Search

The Fifth Neurocritical Care Research Network (NCRN) Conference held in Boca Raton, Florida, in September of 2018 was devoted to challenging the current status quo and examining the role of the Neurocritical Care Society (NCS) in driving the science and research of neurocritical care. The aim of this in-person meeting was to set the agenda for the NCS's Neurocritical Care Research Central, which is the overall research arm of the society. Prior to the meeting, all 103 participants received educational content (book and seminar) on the 'Blue Ocean Strategy ® ,' a concept from the business world which aims to identify undiscovered and uncontested market space, and to brainstorm innovative ideas and methods with which to address current challenges in neurocritical care research. Three five-member working groups met at least four times by teleconference prior to the in-person meeting to prepare answers to a set of questions using the Blue Ocean Strategy concept as a platform. At the Fifth NCRN Conference, these groups presented to a five-member jury and all attendees for open discussion. The jury then developed a set of recommendations for NCS to consider in order to move neurocritical care research forward. We have summarized the topics discussed at the conference and put forward recommendations for the future direction of the NCRN and neurocritical care research in general.

To develop consensus-based recommendations for the management of adult and paediatric patients with NORSE/FIRES based on best evidence and experience.The Delphi methodology was followed. A facilitator group of 9 experts was established, who defined the scope, users and suggestions for recommendations. Following a review of the current literature, recommendation statements concerning diagnosis, treatment and research directions were generated which were then voted on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 9 (strongly agree) by a panel of 48 experts in the field. Consensus that a statement was appropriate was reached if the median score was greater or equal to 7, and inappropriate if the median score was less than or equal to 3. The analysis of evidence was mapped to the results of each statement included in the Delphi survey.Overall, 85 recommendation statements achieved consensus. The recommendations are divided into five sections: 1) disease characteristics, 2) diagnostic testing and sampling, 3) acute treatment, 4) treatment in the post-acute phase, and 5) research, registries and future directions in NORSE/FIRES. The detailed results and discussion of all 85 statements are outlined herein. A corresponding summary of findings and practical flowsheets are presented in a companion article.This detailed analysis offers insight into the supporting evidence and the current gaps in the literature that are associated with expert consensus statements related to NORSE/FIRES. The recommendations generated by this consensus can be used as a guide for the diagnosis, evaluation, and management of patients with NORSE/FIRES, and for planning of future research.

To develop consensus-based recommendations for the management of adult and pediatric patients with NORSE/FIRES based on best available evidence and expert opinion.The Delphi methodology was followed. A facilitator group of 9 experts was established, who defined the scope, users and suggestions for recommendations. Following a review of the current literature, recommendation statements concerning diagnosis, treatment and research directions were generated which were then voted on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 9 (strongly agree) by a panel of 48 experts in the field. Consensus that a statement was appropriate was reached if the median score was greater than or equal to 7, and inappropriate if the median score was less than or equal to 3.Overall, 85 recommendation statements achieved consensus. The recommendations are divided into five sections: 1) disease characteristics, 2) diagnostic testing and sampling, 3) acute treatment, 4) treatment in the post-acute phase, and 5) research, registries and future directions in NORSE/FIRES. These are summarized in this article along with two practical clinical flowsheets: one for diagnosis and evaluation and one for acute treatment. A corresponding evidence-based analysis of all 85 recommendations alongside responses by the Delphi panel is presented in a companion article.The recommendations generated by this consensus can be used as a guide for the diagnosis, evaluation, and management of patients with NORSE/FIRES, and for planning of future research.

To describe the demographics, etiologies, types of status epilepticus (SE), and outcomes in people with refractory and super-refractory SE from around the world, we prospectively collected cases of refractory SE (RSE) treated with continuous intravenous anesthetic drugs in an intensive care unit setting through online questionnaires using "active surveillance." We collected information about 776 cases of RSE in 50 countries over 4 years. Control of SE was achieved in 74% of the cases. Neurologic outcomes were poor in 41% of patients, and 24% died. Good outcome was associated with younger age and a history of epilepsy. Etiology strongly influenced the outcome. Patients from Asia were younger, more frequently presented with convulsive SE, and were more frequently affected by infectious etiologies when compared with patients from Europe and the Americas. Despite these differences, outcomes were similar in all countries. Demographics of patients with RSE in a global audit are similar to those in prior single center series, providing evidence of generalizability of those studies. Important differences exist among patients with RSE from different regions of the world, but these do not seem to significantly influence patient outcomes.