Registro ACESUR: atención de pacientes adultos con crisis epilépticas en servicios de urgencias: diferencias entre primer episodio y recurrencia

Objetivo. Describir las características y la atención recibida de pacientes adultos que consultan por crisis epiléptica (CE) en los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH), diferenciando entre primera crisis y recurrencia en epiléptico conocido. Método. ACESUR es un registro observacional de cohortes multipropósito, prospectivo y multicéntrico con un muestreo sistemático, los días pares de febrero y julio alternando con los impares de abril y octubre de 2017. Se incluyeron pacientes 18 años con diagnóstico de CE en los SUH. Se recogieron variables clínico-asistenciales de la visita índice de pacientes, distinguiendo entre primera CE y recurrencia en epiléptico. Resultados. El registro ACESUR recogió a 664 pacientes procedentes de 18 SUH españoles, 229 (34, 5%) con primera CE y 435 (65, 5%) con CE recurrentes. Los pacientes con primera CE fueron de mayor edad (p < 0, 001), presentaron motivos de consulta distintos (p < 0, 001) y requirieron más traslados en ambulancia (p < 0, 001). La atención recibida en el SUH fue diferente, en pacientes con primera CE se solicitó con mayor probabilidad una prueba complementaria específica (OR ajustada = 13, 94; IC95%:7, 29-26, 7; p < 0, 001) y se necesitó mayor hospitalización o estancia prolongada en el SUH (OR ajustada = 1, 69; IC95%:1, 11-2, 58; p = 0, 015). No hubo diferencias en cuanto al tratamiento farmacológico en fase aguda ni preventivo (OR ajustada = 1, 40; IC95%:0, 94-2, 09; p = 0, 096). Se inició tratamiento con fármacos antiepiépticos (FAE) en 100 pacientes (43, 7%) tras primera CE y se reinició o modificó añadiendo nuevo FAE en 142 pacientes (32, 6%) con CE recurrentes. Conclusiones. Las características clínicas y la atención recibida de pacientes adultos con primera CE en SUH en España difieren de las recurrencias en epiléptico conocido. Objective. To describe the characteristics of care received by patients who come to the emergency department with a first epileptic seizure versus a recurrent seizure in a patient with diagnosed epilepsy. Methods. ACESUR (Acute Epileptic Seizures in the Emergency Department) is a prospective multicenter, multipurpose registry of cases obtained by systematic sampling on even days in February and July 2017 and on odd days in April and October 2017. Patients were aged 18 years or older and had an emergency department diagnosis of epileptic seizure. We recorded clinical variables and details related to care given during each patient''s visit, including whether the event was a first or recurrent seizure. Results. A total of 664 patients attended by 18 Spanish emergency departments were entered into the ACESUR registry. Two hundred twenty-nine (34.5%) were first seizures and 435 (65.5%) were recurrences. Patients who were attended for first seizures were older, consulted for a wider variety of reasons, and were transported in ambulances (P<.001, all comparisons). Care received differed between patients with first seizures versus recurrent seizures. Specific complementary testing was more likely in patients with first seizures (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 13.94; 95% CI, 29-26.7; P<.001), and they were more often hospitalized or stayed longer in the emergency department, (aOR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.11-2.58; P=.015). Pharmacologic treatment did not differ between the groups, either in the acute phase or for prevention (aOR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.94-2.09; P=.096). Antiepileptic drugs were given to 100 patients (43.7%) after a first seizure and were restarted or changed in 142 patients with recurrent seizure (32.6%). Conclusions. The clinical characteristics of adults attended for a first epileptic seizure differ from those of patients with diagnosed epilepsy who were attended for recurrent seizures in Spain. The care received also differs

Comparación de distintas estrategias para la predicción de muerte a corto plazo en el paciente anciano infectado

Objective. The aim of this study was to determine the utility of a post hoc lactate added to SIRS and qSOFA score to predict 30-day mortality in older non-severely dependent patients attended for infection in the Emergency Department (ED). Methods. We performed an analytical, observational, prospective cohort study including patients of 75 years of age or older, without severe functional dependence, attended for an infectious disease in 69 Spanish ED for 2-day three seasonal periods. Demographic, clinical and analytical data were collected. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality after the index event. Results. We included 739 patients with a mean age of 84.9 (SD 6.0) years; 375 (50.7%) were women. Ninety-one (12.3%) died within 30 days. The AUC was 0.637 (IC 95% 0.587-0.688; p= 2 and 0.698 (IC 95% 0.635- 0.761; p= 2. Comparing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) there was a better accuracy of qSOFA vs SIRS (p=0.041). Both scales improve the prognosis accuracy with lactate inclusion. The AUC was 0.705 (IC95% 0.652-0.758; p<0.001) for SIRS plus lactate and 0.755 (IC95% 0.696-0.814; p<0.001) for qSOFA plus lactate, showing a trend to statistical significance for the second strategy (p=0.0727). Charlson index not added prognosis accuracy to SIRS (p=0.2269) or qSOFA (p=0.2573). Conclusions. Lactate added to SIRS and qSOFA score improve the accuracy of SIRS and qSOFA to predict short-term mortality in older non-severely dependent patients attended for infection. There is not effect in adding Charlson index