Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (73)
- Preprint (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (76)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (76)
Keywords
- Epilepsy (18)
- epilepsy (13)
- Seizure (9)
- seizure (7)
- Burden of illness (4)
- Status epilepticus (4)
- temporal lobe epilepsy (4)
- Epilepsie (3)
- Epileptische Anfälle (3)
- Epileptischer Anfall (3)
Institute
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.
The article Therapeutic Options for Patients with Refractory Status Epilepticus in Palliative Settings or with a Limitation of Life‑Sustaining Therapies: A Systematic Review, written by Laurent M. Willems, Sebastian Bauer, Kolja Jahnke, Martin Voss, Felix Rosenow, Adam Strzelczyk, was originally published Online First without Open Access. After publication in volume 34, issue 8, pages 801–826 the author decided to opt for Open Choice and to make the article an Open Access publication. Post-publication open access was funded by Projekt DEAL. Therefore, the copyright of the article has been changed to © The Author(s) 2021 and the article is forthwith distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. The original article has been corrected.
Background Microdeletions are known to confer risk to epilepsy, particularly at genomic rearrangement “hotspot” loci. However, deciphering their role outside hotspots and risk assessment by epilepsy sub-type has not been conducted.
Methods We assessed the burden, frequency and genomic content of rare, large microdeletions found in a previously published cohort of 1,366 patients with Genetic Generalized Epilepsy (GGE) plus two sets of additional unpublished genome-wide microdeletions found in 281 Rolandic Epilepsy (RE) and 807 Adult Focal Epilepsy (AFE) patients, totaling 2,454 cases. These microdeletion sets were assessed in a combined analysis and in sub-type specific approaches against 6,746 ethnically matched controls.
Results When hotspots are considered, we detected an enrichment of microdeletions in the combined epilepsy analysis (adjusted-P= 2.00×10-7; OR = 1.89; 95%-CI: 1.51-2.35), where the implicated microdeletions overlapped with rarely deleted genes and those involved in neurodevelopmental processes. Sub-type specific analyses showed that hotspot deletions in the GGE subgroup contribute most of the signal (adjusted-P = 1.22×10-12; OR = 7.45; 95%-CI = 4.20-11.97). Outside hotspot loci, microdeletions were enriched in the GGE cohort for neurodevelopmental genes (adjusted-P = 4.78×10-3; OR = 2.30; 95%-CI = 1.42-3.70), whereas no additional signal was observed for RE and AFE. Still, gene content analysis was able to identify known (NRXN1, RBFOX1 and PCDH7) and novel (LOC102723362) candidate genes affected in more than one epilepsy sub-type but not in controls.
Conclusions Our results show a heterogeneous effect of recurrent and non-recurrent microdeletions as part of the genetic architecture of GGE and a minor to negligible contribution in the etiology of RE and AFE.
There is a need for diagnostic biomarkers of epilepsy and status epilepticus to support clinical examination, electroencephalography and neuroimaging. Extracellular microRNAs may be potentially ideal biomarkers since some are expressed uniquely within specific brain regions and cell types. Cerebrospinal fluid offers a source of microRNA biomarkers with the advantage of being in close contact with the target tissue and sites of pathology. Here we profiled microRNA levels in cerebrospinal fluid from patients with temporal lobe epilepsy or status epilepticus, and compared findings to matched controls. Differential expression of 20 microRNAs was detected between patient groups and controls. A validation phase included an expanded cohort and samples from patients with other neurological diseases. This identified lower levels of miR-19b in temporal lobe epilepsy compared to controls, status epilepticus and other neurological diseases. Levels of miR-451a were higher in status epilepticus compared to other groups whereas miR-21-5p differed in status epilepticus compared to temporal lobe epilepsy but not to other neurological diseases. Targets of these microRNAs include proteins regulating neuronal death, tissue remodelling, gliosis and inflammation. The present study indicates cerebrospinal fluid contains microRNAs that can support differential diagnosis of temporal lobe epilepsy and status epilepticus from other neurological and non-neurological diseases.
Introduction: Dravet syndrome (DS) is a rare developmental and epileptic encephalopathy. This study estimated cost, cost-driving factors and quality of life (QoL) in patients with Dravet syndrome and their caregivers in a prospective, multicenter study in Germany.
Methods: A validated 3–12-month retrospective questionnaire and a prospective 3-month diary assessing clinical characteristics, QoL, and direct, indirect and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs were administered to caregivers of patients with DS throughout Germany.
Results: Caregivers of 93 patients (mean age 10.1 years, ±7.1, range 15 months–33.7 years) submitted questionnaires and 77 prospective diaries. The majority of patients (95%) experienced at least one seizure during the previous 12 months and 77% a status epilepticus (SE) at least once in their lives. Over 70% of patients had behavioural problems and delayed speech development and over 80% attention deficit symptoms and disturbance of motor skills and movement coordination. Patient QoL was lower than in the general population and 45% of caregivers had some form of depressive symptoms. Direct health care costs per three months were a mean of €6,043 ± €5,825 (median €4054, CI €4935-€7350) per patient. Inpatient costs formed the single most important cost category (28%, €1,702 ± €4,315), followed by care grade benefits (19%, €1,130 ± €805), anti-epileptic drug (AED) costs (15%, €892 ± €1,017) and ancillary treatments (9%, €559 ± €503). Total indirect costs were €4,399 ±€ 4,989 (median €0, CI €3466-€5551) in mothers and €391 ± €1,352 (median €0, CI €195-€841) in fathers. In univariate analysis seizure frequency, experience of SE, nursing care level and severe additional symptoms were found to be associated with total direct healthcare costs. Severe additional symptoms was the single independently significant explanatory factor in a multivariate analysis.
Conclusions: This study over a period up to 15 months revealed substantial direct and indirect healthcare costs of DS in Germany and highlights the relatively low patient and caregiver QoL compared with the general population.
Magnetic resonance-guided laser interstitial laser therapy (MRgLITT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) represent two minimally invasive methods for the treatment of drug-refractory mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (mTLE). We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis to compare outcomes and complications between MRgLITT, RFA, and conventional surgical approaches to the temporal lobe (i.e., anterior temporal lobe resection [ATL] or selective amygdalohippocampectomy [sAHE]). Forty-three studies (13 MRgLITT, 6 RFA, and 24 surgery studies) involved 554, 123, 1504, and 1326 patients treated by MRgLITT, RFA, ATL, or sAHE, respectively. Engel Class I (Engel-I) outcomes were achieved after MRgLITT in 57% (315/554, range = 33.3%–67.4%), RFA in 44% (54/123, range = 0%–67.2%), ATL in 69% (1032/1504, range = 40%–92.9%), and sAHE in 66% (887/1326, range = 21.4%–93.3%). Meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in seizure outcome between MRgLITT and RFA (Q = 2.74, p = .098), whereas ATL and sAHE were both superior to MRgLITT (ATL: Q = 8.92, p = .002; sAHE: Q = 4.33, p = .037) and RFA (ATL: Q = 6.42, p = .0113; sAHE: Q = 5.04, p = .0247), with better outcome in patients at follow-up of 60 months or more. Mesial hippocampal sclerosis (mTLE + hippocampal sclerosis) was associated with significantly better outcome after MRgLITT (Engel-I outcome in 64%; Q = 8.55, p = .0035). The rate of major complications was 3.8% for MRgLITT, 3.7% for RFA, 10.9% for ATL, and 7.4% for sAHE; the differences did not show statistical significance. Neuropsychological deficits occurred after all procedures, with left-sided surgeries having a higher rate of verbal memory impairment. Lateral functions such as naming or object recognition may be more preserved in MRgLITT. Thermal therapies are effective techniques but show a significantly lower rate of Engel-I outcome in comparison to ATL and sAHE. Between MRgLITT and RFA there were no significant differences in Engel-I outcome, whereby the success of treatment seems to depend on the approach used (e.g., occipital approach). MRgLITT shows a similar rate of complications compared to RFA, whereas patients undergoing MRgLITT may experience fewer major complications compared to ATL or sAHE and might have a more beneficial neuropsychological outcome.
Einleitung: Die stereotaktische Laserthermoablation (SLTA) stellt eine minimal-invasive Behandlung für therapierefraktäre Epilepsien auf dem Boden eines hypothalamischen Hamartoms (HH) dar. Durch die weitreichenden Folgen einer therapierefraktären Epilepsie können hohe direkte Kosten entstehen, die durch eine zu erzielende Anfallsfreiheit gesenkt werden können.
Methoden: Anhand einer Patientin mit einem HH sollen die Auswirkungen einer solchen Erkrankung beleuchtet und der Krankheitsverlauf nach erfolgter SLTA dargestellt werden. Zur Beurteilung der Kosteneffizienz der SLTA wurden die direkten Kosten, basierend auf den Krankenversicherungsdaten der Patientin, über die Versicherungsjahre 2017 bis 2020 analysiert.
Ergebnisse:
Bei der Patientin bestand eine hochaktive, medikamentenrefraktäre Epilepsie mit erhöhtem Verletzungsrisiko und zunehmender Verschlechterung der schulischen Leistung und der psychischen Verfassung. Begleitend bestand durch das HH eine Pubertas praecox. Nach SLTA entwickelte die Patientin mit einem Follow-up von 26 Monaten eine vollständige Anfallsfreiheit sowie eine endokrinologische Stabilisierung, sodass die antikonvulsive als auch die hormonelle Medikation im Verlauf beendet werden konnten. Relevante persistierende Komplikationen wurden nicht beobachtet. Die direkten jährlichen Kosten (stationär [ausschließlich der SLTA selbst]/ambulant/Medikamente) reduzierten sich von € 6603 in 2017 und € 12.903 in 2018 auf € 3609 in 2019 und zuletzt € 617 in 2020, was einer Reduktion von bis zu 95 % (2018 gegenüber 2020) entsprach. Zusätzlich konnten die Kosten einer geplanten Integrationsassistenz von schätzungsweise € 18.000/Jahr eingespart werden.
Schlussfolgerung: Die SLTA stellt eine effektive und risikoarme Behandlung von HH dar und führt bereits nach 2 Jahren zu einer relevanten Einsparung der direkten Kosten, was bei der Kosten-Nutzen-Abwägung der SLTA einzubeziehen ist.
Objective To evaluate the success of initiation of adjunctive brivaracetam in patients who required a change in antiepileptic drug (AED) regimen and substituted at least one AED with brivaracetam. Methods In this retrospective noninterventional study conducted in specialized epilepsy centers across Germany, patients initiated adjunctive brivaracetam between February 15, 2016, and August 31, 2016, as part of an intended change in AED regimen. The primary effectiveness variable was the proportion of patients who continued on brivaracetam after 3 months, and withdrew at least one AED either before or within 6 months after brivaracetam initiation. Results Five hundred and six patients had at least one brivaracetam dose and were included in the safety set (SS). Four hundred and seventy patients started to reduce the dose of one AED before/after brivaracetam initiation, had at least one concomitant AED at brivaracetam initiation, and were included in the full analysis set (FAS) for effectiveness analyses. At baseline, patients had a median of seven lifetime AEDs and a median of 3.8 seizures/28 days. In the SS, 85.2% of patients withdrew one AED before/after initiation of brivaracetam, most commonly levetiracetam (49.4%). 46.2% of patients substituted another AED with brivaracetam within 24 hours (fast withdrawal). The proportions of patients (FAS) who continued on brivaracetam after 3 and 6 months and withdrew one AED were 75.5% and 46.6%, respectively. After 6 months, 32.1% of patients were 50% responders; 13.0% were seizure‐free. In the SS, 34.6% of patients reported treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs); 21.9% had TEAEs that were assessed by the treating physician as drug‐related. Incidences of behavioral AEs before (3‐month baseline) and after brivaracetam initiation in patients who withdrew levetiracetam were 19.2% and 8.0%, respectively (5.0% and 7.7% in patients who withdrew other AEDs). Significance Brivaracetam was effective and well‐tolerated in patients who required a change in AED drug regimen and initiated adjunctive brivaracetam in German clinical practice.
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.