Talk:Status epilepticus

message: Is there another drug name missing from this paragraph? (i.e. The pharmacological effects of what were longer lasting than diazepam?) Introspensive 20:51, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing drug name?

message: Could someone provide a reference, or possibly update the statement in the intro of "There is some evidence that five minutes is sufficient to damage neurons and that seizures are unlikely to self-terminate by that time.". I can't seem to find anywhere that backs that claim up; some places like UptoDate suggest 30-60mins, and another website (I've closed it now, can't remember where it was) said there's no evidence less than 20 minutes of continuous seizure activity causes permanent damage. 
I'm certainly not qualified to do this myself.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.100.212.146 (talk) 01:07, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neuronal injury in 5 minutes 

message: I think it would be helpful to extend the article to currently used typifying of SE's accepted internationally by neurology/epileptology organizations (i.e., instead of dichotomisation only to convulsive and nonconvulsive SE's,
(1)generalised tonic-clonic seizure status, (2)convulsive and nonconvulsive simple- or complex-focal seizures status, (3)absence status (generalised nonconvulsive seizure status) and (4)"subtle status epilepticus").
I think, that the overview of medicamentous treatment options should be "staged" (i.e., 1) BZD, if not effective, than 2) PHE or VAL, if not effective, than 3) BARBs, if not effective, than 4) general anesthesia ± muscle (curaremimetic) relaxation.
In the first-line treatment options, use of lorazepam IV should be stressed, as some reliable sources suggests that the anticonvulsive effect of IV lorazepam lasts for substantialy longer periods than that of IV diazepam and is more versatile than that of IV clonazepam. (thus, http://dgn.dgni.de/132.0.html suggests IV lorazepam to be the first-line-option of the step 1) of the "medication ladder", followed by IV clonazepam and at last, by IV diazepam)
Also, in my opinion, the IV administered valproate (sodium valproate inj. sol., parenteral equivalent to valproate/divalproex), should be added as a possible option in step 2) of the "medication ladder" (i.e. if the SE is BZD-refractory), along with phenytoin. German Neurologic Society does so.--Spiperon 20:41, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some further structuring of the article 

message: I'm updating this article's reference style to Cite.php; the current reference section is unmanageably long, and the new style is much easier to use. If anyone has any objections, please feel free to revert. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ref style 

message: I've just read this and have following comments.
The treatment section can be streamlined by putting into a first section to "Standard Therapies" referring to the Vet Admin prospective study on status epilepticus Treiman et al NEJM 1998 and numerous subsequent review articles on the recommended protocol (Lowenstein et al, NEJM 1998) of staged lorazepam, phenytoin, .... and then to "Other therapies for refractory status epilepticus" to account for the numerous other options, some of which are mentioned in the current article.
A brief section on pathophysiology could mention the critical role of time in SE as demonstrated by Meldrum et al (Arch Neurol 1973)
Karmattol (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update/animal models 

message: This sounds very much like original research.  In addition, in my experience it is not particularly "notable" - there are many episodes like this.  Should it be retained? Scray (talk) 10:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone else did the deletion, but did not justify the deletion to the satisfaction of a third person who thought that was censorship (and apparently didn't see this section on the talk page).  I have deleted the passage, because: the passage sounds like a personal report (i.e. original research smacking of conflict of interest), it lacks neutral point of view and reliable sources.  Anyone feel this is inappropriate?  --Scray (talk) 07:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Status_epilepticus#Notable_Instances]] 

message: I have been admininistered Propofol during neuorsurgery following an apoplelptic pituitary tumor with an in-situ CSF leak, resulting in seizures, and I can tell you with great authority that I am most certainly not dead.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calitrappedindc (talk • contribs) 03:23, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue with ref (15) reference 

message: Ref says "SE is one of the most common neurologic emergency, with an overall annual incidence of 10–41 per 100,000" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:03, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Frequency

message: The current definition is more than 5 minutes. Ref says "E is defined as convulsions lasting for 5 or more minutes or recurrent episodes of convulsions in a 5-minute interval without return to preconvulsive neurologic baseline." The older definition was 30 minutes. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:05, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This definition is now, again, the thirty minute one according to the 2016 ILAE Glauser et al guidelines, motion to change this and cite the latest ILAE guidelines? Aglo123 (talk) 16:16, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

text: Apologies; AES, not ILAE, guidelines Aglo123 (talk) 16:17, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

text: Apologies, again, I realize my mistake. The ILAE definition has the convulsive SE type as lasting longer than 5 minu
s, and the other was 10 minutes...Maybe that should be differentiated in the intro paragraph?e  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aglo123 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Status

message: In Lancet Neurology doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00042-3 JFW | T@lk 14:48, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review 

message: Could mention Ketogenic Diet May Help in Tough-to-Treat Epilespy in Research ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:11, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ketogenic diet being considered 

message: Intro makes it sound like a person only has one acute occurrence, yet the suggestion for ketogenic diets implies they are a preventive measure to reduce future occurrence. How often do they tend to happen ? Once you've had one, what is the risk of another within a year (compared with not having had it) ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:22, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only single acute attacks, or increased risk of future attacks 

message: welcome all, 
I am a undergraduate student from Uskudar university, Istanbul/Turkiye, 
I am proceeding my summer course 2023: Special Topics in Neuroscience, in which we are required to edit Wikipedia articles related to Neuroscience, editing status epilepticus is my assignment. You feel free to give feedbacks. SM2108 (talk) 13:52, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hi Wikipedian 

message: I found the "Prevalence" section to be confusing.  Splitting at least one of the sentences into two will help, but it may need to be completely restructured. RowanDreamer (talk) 04:33, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section unclear