Refine
Document Type
- Article (50)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (51)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (51)
Keywords
- Epilepsy (12)
- epilepsy (9)
- Seizure (7)
- seizure (7)
- Dravet syndrome (3)
- Epileptischer Anfall (3)
- Quality of life (3)
- fenfluramine (3)
- levetiracetam (3)
- Cannabidiol (2)
Institute
- Medizin (51)
- Georg-Speyer-Haus (1)
- Pharmazie (1)
Objective: We sought to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of intranasal midazolam (in‐MDZ) as first‐line inhospital therapy in patients with status epilepticus (SE) during continuous EEG recording.
Methods: Data on medical history, etiology and semiology of SE, anticonvulsive medication usage, efficacy and safety of in‐MDZ were retrospectively reviewed between 2015 and 2018. Time to end of SE regarding the administration of in‐MDZ and ß‐band effects were analyzed on EEG and with frequency analysis.
Results: In total, 42 patients (mean age: 52.7 ± 22.7 years; 23 females) were treated with a median dose of 5 mg of in‐MDZ (range: 2.5–15 mg, mean: 6.4 mg, SD: 2.6) for SE. The majority of the patients suffered from nonconvulsive SE (n = 24; 55.8%). In total, 24 (57.1%) patients were responders, as SE stopped following the administration of in‐MDZ without any other drugs being given. On average, SE ceased on EEG at 05:05 (minutes:seconds) after the application of in‐MDZ (median: 04:56; range: 00:29–14:53; SD:03:13). Frequency analysis showed an increased ß‐band on EEG after the application of in‐MDZ at 04:07 on average (median: 03:50; range: 02:20–05:40; SD: 01:09). Adverse events were recorded in six patients (14.3%), with nasal irritations present in five (11.9%) and prolonged sedation occurring in one (2.6%) patient.
Conclusions: This pharmaco‐EEG–based study showed that in‐MDZ is effective and well‐tolerated for the acute treatment of SE. EEG and clinical effects of in‐MDZ administration occurred within 04:07 and 5:05 on average. Intranasal midazolam appears to be an easily applicable and rapidly effective alternative to buccal or intramuscular application as first‐line treatment if an intravenous route is not available.
Background: Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) has been investigated regarding its therapeutic properties in several several conditions such as epilepsy, migraine and major depressive disorder and was shown to access similar neural pathways as invasive vagus nerve stimulation. While the vagus nerve's role in gut motility is physiologically established, the effect of taVNS has scarcely been investigated in humans and yielded conflicting results. Real-time gastric magnetic resonance imaging (rtMRI) is an established reproducible method to investigate gastric motility non-invasively. Objective: To investigate the influence of taVNS on gastric motility of healthy participants using rtMRI. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind study using high-frequency (HF) stimulation at 25Hz or low-frequency (LF) taVNS at 1Hz after ingestions of a standardized meal in 57 healthy participants. The gastric motility index (GMI) was determined by measuring the amplitude and velocity of the peristaltic waves using rtMRI. Results: After HF taVNS, GMI was significantly higher than after LF stimulation (p = 0.005), which was mainly attributable to a higher amplitude of the peristaltic waves (p = 0.003). Conclusion: We provide evidence that 4-h of taVNS influences gastric motility in healthy human participants for the first time using rtMRI. HF stimulation is associated with higher amplitudes of peristaltic waves in the gastric antrum compared to LF stimulation. Further studies are needed to investigate the effect of different frequencies of taVNS and its therapeutic properties in conditions with impaired gastric motility.
Background: Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) represents a serious medical condition requiring early and targeted therapy. Given the increasing number of elderly or multimorbid patients with a limitation of life-sustaining therapy (LOT) or within a palliative care setting (PCS), guidelines-oriented therapy escalation options for RSE have to be omitted frequently. Objectives: This systematic review sought to summarize the evidence for fourth-line antiseizure drugs (ASDs) and other minimally or non-invasive therapeutic options beyond guideline recommendations in patients with RSE to elaborate on possible treatment options for patients undergoing LOT or in a PCS. Methods: A systematic review of the literature in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, focusing on fourth-line ASDs or other minimally or non-invasive therapeutic options was performed in February and June 2020 using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. The search terminology was constructed using the name of the specific ASD or therapy option and the term ‘status epilepticus’ with the use of Boolean operators, e.g. “(brivaracetam) AND (status epilepticus)”. The respective Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Emtree terms were used, if available. Results: There is currently no level 1, grade A evidence for the use of ASDs in RSE. The best evidence was found for the use of lacosamide and topiramate (level 3, grade C), followed by brivaracetam, perampanel (each level 4, grade D) and stiripentol, oxcarbazepine and zonisamide (each level 5, grade D). Regarding non-medicinal options, there is little evidence for the use of the ketogenic diet (level 4, grade D) and magnesium sulfate (level 5, grade D) in RSE. The broad use of immunomodulatory or immunosuppressive treatment options in the absence of a presumed autoimmune etiology cannot be recommended; however, if an autoimmune etiology is assumed, steroid pulse, intravenous immunoglobulins and plasma exchange/plasmapheresis should be considered (level 4, grade D). Even if several studies suggested that the use of neurosteroids (level 5, grade D) is beneficial in RSE, the current data situation indicates that there is formal evidence against it. Conclusions: RSE in patients undergoing LOT or in a PCS represents a challenge for modern clinicians and epileptologists. The evidence for the use of ASDs in RSE beyond that in current guidelines is low, but several effective and well-tolerated options are available that should be considered in this patient population. More so than in any other population, advance care planning, advance directives, and medical ethical aspects have to be considered carefully before and during therapy.
Objective: Dravet syndrome (DS) is a rare but severe drug-resistant epilepsy. Before the approval of fenfluramine (FFA) for the treatment of seizures in DS, patients in Germany could receive treatment under a compassionate use program (CUP). Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective, observational study to describe the efficacy, tolerability, and retention of FFA within the CUP. Patients received add-on therapy with oral FFA gradually titrated to a target dose between .13 and .7 mg/kg/day Results: Overall, 78 patients with DS (median age = 8.0 years, range = 2.1–46.0; 53% female, median concomitant antiseizure medications [ASMs] = 3) were treated with FFA for a median duration of 255.5 days (range = 31–572). Responder rates (a ≥50% reduction; n = 78) and seizure-freedom rates at 3 months were 68% and 14% for total seizures, respectively, and 67% and 23% for generalized tonic–clonic seizures. Responder rates were consistent at 6 and 12 months (n = 66 and n = 43, respectively). Median seizure days per month significantly decreased from 10.0 (range = .5–30) to 3.0 (range = 0–30) in the 3-month period before and after FFA treatment (p < .001). Significantly fewer patients reported at least one episode of status epilepticus (28% vs. 14% patients before and after FFA initiation, p = .005). During FFA treatment, 35 (45%) patients were able to discontinue a concomitant ASM. At the last follow-up date, 66 (85%) patients remained on treatment with FFA. The most common adverse events were somnolence (36%), decreased appetite (22%), and ataxia (8%). Forty-eight (62%) patients were reported as having a meaningful global clinical improvement. Significance: In a large cohort of patients, FFA demonstrated efficacy across a range of outcomes including clinically significant reductions in convulsive seizures, and was well tolerated, providing valuable information for real-world practice.
Objective: This study was undertaken to evaluate the long-term efficacy, retention, and tolerability of add-on brivaracetam (BRV) in clinical practice. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study recruited all patients who initiated BRV between February and November 2016, with observation until February 2021. Results: Long-term data for 262 patients (mean age = 40 years, range = 5–81 years, 129 men) were analyzed, including 227 (87%) diagnosed with focal epilepsy, 19 (7%) with genetic generalized epilepsy, and 16 (6%) with other or unclassified epilepsy syndromes. Only 26 (10%) patients had never received levetiracetam (LEV), whereas 133 (50.8%) were switched from LEV. The length of BRV exposure ranged from 1 day to 5 years, with a median retention time of 1.6 years, resulting in a total BRV exposure time of 6829 months (569 years). The retention rate was 61.1% at 12 months, with a reported efficacy of 33.1% (79/239; 50% responder rate, 23 patients lost-to-follow-up), including 10.9% reported as seizure-free. The retention rate for the entire study period was 50.8%, and at last follow-up, 133 patients were receiving BRV at a mean dose of 222 ± 104 mg (median = 200, range = 25–400), including 52 (39.1%) who exceeded the recommended upper dose of 200 mg. Fewer concomitant antiseizure medications and switching from LEV to BRV correlated with better short-term responses, but no investigated parameters correlated with positive long-term outcomes. BRV was discontinued in 63 (24%) patients due to insufficient efficacy, in 29 (11%) for psychobehavioral adverse events, in 25 (10%) for other adverse events, and in 24 (9%) for other reasons. Significance: BRV showed a clinically useful 50% responder rate of 33% at 12 months and overall retention of >50%, despite 90% of included patients having previous LEV exposure. BRV was well tolerated; however, psychobehavioral adverse events occurred in one out of 10 patients. Although we identified short-term response and retention predictors, we could not identify significant predictors for long-term outcomes. Key Points Long-term postmarketing data for brivaracetam in 262 patients showed an overall retention rate of 50.8%; At 12 months, the 50% responder rate for brivaracetam was 33.1%, with 10.9% reporting seizure freedom; Previous treatment with levetiracetam (90%) did not impact brivaracetam retention or efficacy; Levetiracetam treatment failure should not preclude brivaracetam introduction; No long-term efficacy predictors could be identified.
Purpose: 10-year retrospective study to assess burden of illness in individuals with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) identified from German healthcare data. Methods: Patients with TSC were identified by International Classification of Diseases code Q85.1. Patients with epilepsy were identified by epilepsy diagnosis or antiseizure medication (ASM) prescription after TSC diagnosis. Results: Using data from 2016 (final study year), 100 patients with TSC were identified (mean [range] age: 38 [1–86] years; male: 40%); prevalence: 7.9 per 100,000 (TSC), 2.2 per 100,000 (TSC with epilepsy). During the 10-year study period (2007–2016), 256 patients with TSC were identified and followed up for 1,784 patient- years (epilepsy: 36%, 616 patient-years). TSC manifestations/comorbidities (apart from epilepsy) were identi- fied more frequently in patients with epilepsy than without. Mean annual healthcare costs for patients with TSC were €6,139 per patient-year (PPY), mostly attributable to medication (35%) and inpatient care (29%). Patients with epilepsy incurred costs more than double those without. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) annual hospi- talisation rate (AHR) and length of stay (LOS) PPY: 0.5 (1.0) and 5.9 (18.6) days for TSC. AHR and LOS were greater in patients with epilepsy than without. Mean (SD) number of ASMs prescribed (TSC with epilepsy): 3.0 (2.3) over the entire observable time per patient. Mortality rates (vs. control): 5.08% (vs. 1.69%, p<0.001) for TSC, 7.53% (vs. 0.98%, p<0.001) for TSC with epilepsy, 3.68% (vs. 2.03%, p = 0.003) for TSC without epilepsy. Conclusion: Healthcare costs, resource utilisation, and mortality were greater in patients with TSC and epilepsy than those without epilepsy.
Background: Mechanical thrombectomy and systemic thrombolysis are important therapies for stroke patients. However, there is disagreement about the accompanying risk of acute symptomatic seizures.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients with an acute ischaemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion was performed. The patients were divided into four groups based on whether they received either mechanical thrombectomy (MT) or systemic thrombolysis (ST; group 1: MT+/ST−; group 2: MT+/ST+; group 3: MT−/ST+; group 4: MT−/ST−). Propensity score matching was conducted for each group combination (1:3, 1:4, 2:3, 2:4, 1:2, 3:4) using the covariates “NIHSS at admission”, “mRS prior to event” and “age”. The primary endpoint was defined as the occurrence of acute symptomatic seizures.
Results: A total of 987 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 208, 264, 169 and 346 belonged to groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Propensity score matched groups consisted of 160:160, 143:143, 156:156, 144:144, 204:204 and 165:165 patients for the comparisons 1:3, 1:4, 2:3, 2:4, 1:2 and 3:4, respectively. Based on chi-squared tests, there was no significant difference in the frequency of acute symptomatic seizures between the groups. Subgroups varied in their frequency of acute symptomatic seizures, ranging from 2.8 to 3.8%, 2.8–4.4%, 3.6–3.8% and 4.9–6.3% in groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively.
Conclusion: There was no association between MT or ST and an increased risk of acute symptomatic seizures in patients with an acute ischaemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion who were treated at a primary stroke centre.
Dravet syndrome is a severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathy characterised by refractory seizures and cognitive dysfunction. The treatment is challenging, not least because the seizures are highly drug resistant, requiring multiple anti-seizure medications (ASMs), while some ASMs can exacerbate seizures. Initial treatments include the broad-spectrum ASMs valproate (VPA), and clobazam (CLB) in some regions; however, they are generally insufficient to control seizures. With this in mind, three adjunct ASMs have been approved specifically for the treatment of seizures in patients with Dravet syndrome: stiripentol (STP) in 2007 in the European Union and 2018 in the USA, cannabidiol (CBD) in 2018/2019 (in combination with CLB in the European Union) and fenfluramine (FFA) in 2020. These “add-on” therapies (mostly to VPA/CLB) are used as escalation therapies, with the choice dependent on availability in different countries, patient characteristics and caregiver preferences. Topiramate is also frequently used, with evidence of efficacy in Dravet syndrome, and there is anecdotal evidence of efficacy with bromide, which is frequently used in Germany and Japan. With a growing treatment landscape for Dravet syndrome, there can be practical challenges for clinicians, particularly with issues associated with polypharmacy. This practical guide provides an overview of these main ASMs including their indications/contraindications, mechanism of action, efficacy, safety and tolerability profile, dosage requirements, and laboratory and clinical parameters to be evaluated. Standard laboratory and clinical parameters include blood counts, liver function tests, serum concentrations of ASMs, monitoring the growth of children, as well as weight loss and acceleration of behavioural problems. Regular cardiac monitoring is also important with FFA as it has previously been associated with cases of cardiac valve disease when used in adults at high doses (up to 120 mg/day) in combination with phentermine as a therapy for obesity. Importantly, no signs of heart valve disease have been documented to date at the low doses used in patients with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies. In addition, potential drug–drug interactions and their consequences are a key consideration in everyday practice. Interactions that potentially require dosage adjustments to alleviate adverse events include the following: STP + CLB resulting in increased plasma concentrations of CLB and its active metabolite norclobazam may increase somnolence, and an interaction with STP and VPA may increase gastrointestinal adverse events. Cannabidiol has a bi-directional interaction with CLB producing an increase in plasma concentrations of 7-OH-CBD and norclobazam resulting in the potential for increased somnolence and sedation. In addition, CBD is associated with elevations of liver transaminases particularly in patients taking concomitant VPA. The interaction between FFA and STP requires a dose reduction of FFA. Furthermore, concomitant administration of VPA with topiramate has been associated with encephalopathy and/or hyperammonaemia. Finally, we briefly describe other ASMs used in Dravet syndrome, and current key clinical trials.
Background: The inclusion of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in therapeutic algorithms has led to significant survival benefits in patients with various metastatic cancers. Concurrently, an increasing number of neurological immune related adverse events (IRAE) has been observed. In this retrospective analysis, we examine the ICI-induced incidence of cerebral pseudoprogression and propose a classification system.
Methods: We screened our hospital information system to identify patients with any in-house ICI treatment for any tumor disease during the years 2007-2019. All patients with cerebral MR imaging (cMRI) of sufficient diagnostic quality were included. cMRIs were retrospectively analyzed according to immunotherapy response assessment for neuro-oncology (iRANO) criteria.
Results: We identified 12 cases of cerebral pseudoprogression in 123 patients treated with ICIs and sufficient MRI. These patients were receiving ICI therapy for lung cancer (n=5), malignant melanoma (n=4), glioblastoma (n=1), hepatocellular carcinoma (n=1) or lymphoma (n=1) when cerebral pseudoprogression was detected. Median time from the start of ICI treatment to pseudoprogression was 5 months. All but one patient developed neurological symptoms. Three different patterns of cerebral pseudoprogression could be distinguished: new or increasing contrast-enhancing lesions, new or increasing T2 predominant lesions and cerebral vasculitis type pattern.
Conclusion: Cerebral pseudoprogression followed three distinct patterns and was detectable in 3.2% of all patients during ICI treatment and in 9.75% of the patients with sufficient brain imaging follow up. The fact that all but one of the affected patients developed neurological symptoms, which would be classified as progressive disease according to iRANO criteria, mandates vigilance in the diagnosis and treatment of ICI-induced cerebral lesions.