ArticleNeurocritical care2024
Electroconvulsive Therapy in Refractory and Super-Refractory Status Epilepticus in Adults: A Scoping Review.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Epilepsy in dentatorubral-pallidoluysian atrophy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Epilepsia · 2026Pooled it
- Restimulation could stop status epilepticus after electroconvulsive therapy: 2 case reports.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Clinical characterization and management of persons with comorbid epilepsy and depression: an expert opinion paper.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Quantitative evaluation of electrographic response to electroconvulsive therapy in super-refractory status epilepticus.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectroconvulsive therapy (ECT) has been suggested as a treatment option for refractory status epilepticus (RSE) and super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE).
objectiveThe objective of this scoping review was to conduct an extensive literature review on the role of ECT as a treatment option for RSE and SRSE.
methodsWe searched Ovid MEDLINE and Scopus for journal articles from database inception until February 2024. Articles were then selected based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
resultsWe identified five retrospective case series with 28 adult patients receiving ECT for RSE or SRSE. ECT was administered within 3-70 days (mean 20 days) after the development of SE, and the mean number of ECT courses ranged from 1 to 12 sessions for each patient. ECT was administered in fixed or titrated doses. A total of 20 out of 28 patients (71%) showed clinical improvement, with two (7%) having complete cessation of seizures. It is essential to note that given the lack of control, there could be overreporting of clinical improvement in these studies. 11 patients (39%) were reported as deceased due to causes that were not directly related to ECT treatment. Four patients (14%) reported adverse effects of ECT, including memory, concentration, and/or cognitive impairment.
conclusionsThere are level-4 Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine evidence and low-level Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Education evidence that suggest ECT as a treatment option for RSE and SRSE. In light of the limitations of the existing evidence, clinicians should carefully consider individual patients' clinical contexts when deciding on the appropriateness of ECT as a treatment option. Further research, including prospective studies with controlled designs, is needed to elucidate the efficacy, safety, and optimal regime of ECT in the management of RSE and SRSE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38769254What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.