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
Hintergrund: Die Analyse krankheitsspezifischer Kosten gewinnt in einem zunehmend ökonomisch ausgerichteten Gesundheitssystem an Relevanz, wobei vor allem chronische Erkrankungen aufgrund der langen Krankheitsdauer sowie häufiger Hospitalisierung und Arztbesuche von besonderem Interesse sind. Epilepsien stellen eine häufige neurologische Erkrankung dar, welche mit paroxysmal auftretenden epileptischen Anfällen und häufig hiermit assoziierten Verletzungen einhergeht und alle Altersgruppen betrifft.
Ziel: Ziel der Arbeit ist die Aufarbeitung der stationären Behandlungskosten anfallsbedingter Verletzungen sowie die Analyse hinsichtlich relevanter kostenverursachender Faktoren. Mittels alternativer Kalkulation der Versorgungskosten soll zusätzlich der Frage nach potenziellen Vergütungsproblemen im aktuellen DRG-System („diagnosis related groups“) nachgegangen werden.
Methoden: Grundlage dieser monozentrischen, retrospektiven Analyse ist der tatsächliche Erlös der stationären Behandlung von 62 Patienten, die zwischen 01/2010 und 01/2018 im Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt aufgrund von Verletzungen im Rahmen epileptischer Anfälle erfolgte. Die Analyse potenzieller kostenverursachender Faktoren bezog sich auf relevante soziodemographische und klinische Aspekte, die alternative Kalkulation der Versorgungskosten wurde mit gängigen gesundheitsökonomischen Methoden durchgeführt.
Ergebnisse: Der mittlere DRG-Erlös betrug 7408 € (±8993 €, Median 5086 €, Spanne 563–44.519 €), die mittleren kalkulierten Kosten 9423 € (±11.113 €, 5626 €, Spanne 587–49.830 €). Als signifikant kostenverursachender Faktor konnte eine Liegedauer ≥7 Tage (p = 0,014) identifiziert werden. Aufgrund des signifikanten Unterschieds (p < 0,001) zwischen Erlös und kalkulierten Kosten erfolgte eine Analyse nach Faktoren für potenzielle Vergütungsprobleme, welche für eine Aufenthaltsdauer von ≥7 Tagen (p = 0,014) sowie für eine Behandlung auf Intensivstation (p = 0,019) signifikant verblieb.
Schlussfolgerung: Die stationären Versorgungskosten von Patienten mit Frakturen aufgrund epileptischer Anfälle sind hoch und daher gesundheitsökonomisch relevant. Generell scheint die auf Fallpauschalen basierende Vergütung nach G‑DRG die tatsächlichen Kosten zu decken, bei Patienten mit einer langen Liegedauer oder einen Aufenthalt auf Intensivstation können jedoch Vergütungsprobleme bestehen.
Background: Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is a severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathy characterized by drug-resistant epilepsy with multiple seizure types starting in childhood, a typical slow spike-wave pattern on electroencephalogram, and cognitive dysfunction.
Methods: We performed a systematic literature review according to the PRISMA guidelines to identify, synthesize and appraise the burden of illness in LGS (including “probable” LGS). Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase and APA PsychInfo, Cochrane’s database of systematic reviews, and Epistemonikos. The outcomes were epidemiology (incidence, prevalence or mortality), direct and indirect costs, healthcare resource utilization, and patient and caregiver health-related quality of life (HRQoL).
Results: The search identified 22 publications evaluating the epidemiology (n = 10), direct costs and resource (n = 10) and/or HRQoL (n = 5). No studies reporting on indirect costs were identified. With no specific ICD code for LGS in many regions, several studies had to rely upon indirect methods to identify their patient populations (e.g., algorithms to search insurance claims databases to identify “probable” LGS). There was heterogeneity between studies in how LGS was defined, the size of the populations, ages of the patients and length of the follow-up period. The prevalence varied from 4.2 to 60.8 per 100,000 people across studies for probable LGS and 2.9–28 per 100,000 for a confirmed/narrow definition of LGS. LGS was associated with high mortality rates compared to the general population and epilepsy population. Healthcare resource utilization and direct costs were substantial across all studies. Mean annual direct costs per person varied from $24,048 to $80,545 across studies, and home-based care and inpatient care were significant cost drivers. Studies showed that the HRQoL of patients and caregivers was adversely affected, although only a few studies were identified. In addition, studies suggested that seizure events were associated with higher costs and worse HRQoL. The risk of bias was low or moderate in most studies.
Conclusions: LGS is associated with a significant burden of illness featuring resistant seizures associated with higher costs and worse HRQoL. More research is needed, especially in evaluating indirect costs and caregiver burden, where there is a notable lack of studies.
Background: Epilepsy surgery is an established treatment for drug-resistant focal epilepsy (DRFE) that results in seizure freedom in about 60% of patients. Correctly identifying an epileptogenic lesion in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is challenging but highly relevant since it improves the likelihood of being referred for presurgical diagnosis. The epileptogenic lesion’s etiology directly relates to the surgical intervention’s indication and outcome. Therefore, it is vital to correctly identify epileptogenic lesions and their etiology presurgically.
Methods: We compared the final histopathological diagnoses of all patients with DRFE undergoing epilepsy surgery at our center between 2015 and 2021 with their MRI diagnoses before and after presurgical diagnosis at our epilepsy center, including MRI evaluations by expert epilepsy neuroradiologists. Additionally, we analyzed the outcome of different subgroups.
Results: This study included 132 patients. The discordance between histopathology and MRI diagnoses significantly decreased from 61.3% for non-expert MRI evaluations (NEMRIs) to 22.1% for epilepsy center MRI evaluations (ECMRIs; p < 0.0001). The MRI-sensitivity improved significantly from 68.6% for NEMRIs to 97.7% for ECMRIs (p < 0.0001). Identifying focal cortical dysplasia (FCD) and amygdala dysplasia was the most challenging for both subgroups. 65.5% of patients with negative NEMRI were seizure-free 12 months postoperatively, no patient with negative ECMRI achieved seizure-freedom. The mean duration of epilepsy until surgical intervention was 13.6 years in patients with an initial negative NEMRI and 9.5 years in patients with a recognized lesion in NEMRI.
Conclusions: This study provides evidence that for patients with DRFE—especially those with initial negative findings in a non-expert MRI—an early consultation at an epilepsy center, including an ECMRI, is important for identifying candidates for epilepsy surgery. NEMRI-negative findings preoperatively do not preclude seizure freedom postoperatively. Therefore, patients with DRFE that remain MRI-negative after initial NEMRI should be referred to an epilepsy center for presurgical evaluation. Nonreferral based on NEMRI negativity may harm such patients and delay surgical intervention. However, ECMRI-negative patients have a reduced chance of becoming seizure-free after epilepsy surgery. Further improvements in MRI technique and evaluation are needed and should be directed towards improving sensitivity for FCDs and amygdala dysplasias.
Background: Novel treatments are needed to control refractory status epilepticus (SE). This study aimed to assess the potential effectiveness of fenfluramine (FFA) as an acute treatment option for SE. We present a summary of clinical cases where oral FFA was used in SE.
Methods: A case of an adult patient with Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) who was treated with FFA due to refractory SE is presented in detail. To identify studies that evaluated the use of FFA in SE, we performed a systematic literature search.
Results: Four case reports on the acute treatment with FFA of SE in children and adults with Dravet syndrome (DS) and LGS were available. We report in detail a 30-year-old woman with LGS of structural etiology, who presented with generalized tonic and dialeptic seizures manifesting at high frequencies without a return to clinical baseline constituting the diagnosis of SE. Treatment with anti-seizure medications up to lacosamide 600 mg/d, brivaracetam 300 mg/d, valproate 1,600 mg/d, and various benzodiazepines did not resolve the SE. Due to ongoing refractory SE and following an unremarkable echocardiography, treatment was initiated with FFA, with an initial dose of 10 mg/d (0.22 mg/kg body weight [bw]) and fast up-titration to 26 mg/d (0.58 mg/kg bw) within 10 days. Subsequently, the patient experienced a resolution of SE within 4 days, accompanied by a notable improvement in clinical presentation and regaining her mobility, walking with the assistance of physiotherapists. In the three cases reported in the literature, DS patients with SE were treated with FFA, and a cessation of SE was observed within a few days. No treatment-emergent adverse events were observed during FFA treatment in any of the four cases.
Conclusions: Based on the reported cases, FFA might be a promising option for the acute treatment of SE in patients with DS and LGS. Observational data show a decreased SE frequency while on FFA, suggesting a potentially preventive role of FFA in these populations.
Key points
* We summarize four cases of refractory status epilepticus (SE) successfully treated with fenfluramine.
* Refractory SE resolved after 4–7 days on fenfluramine.
* Swift fenfluramine up-titration was well-tolerated during SE treatment.
* Treatment-emergent adverse events on fenfluramine were not observed.
* Fenfluramine might be a valuable acute treatment option for SE in Dravet and Lennox–Gastaut syndromes.
Highlights
• It is important to distinguish acute provoked seizures due to autoimmune encephalitis from chronic unprovoked seizures due to autoimmune-associated epilepsy.
• Currently it is hardly possible in an individual AIE/ALE/RE patient to separate acute provoked seizures from chronic unprovoked seizures due to limitations in determining seizure outcomes, unclear time courses, potential causal interactions between both seizure origins, compartmentalized immune-inflammation, and a lack of licensed drugs to reliably resolve immune-inflammation in the brain parenchyma.
• This makes it hard to decide when to terminate ASMs and to counsel the individual patient regarding driving abilities and other behavioral restrictions and recommendations.
• Studies are urgently needed to define clinical and paraclinical biomarkers in a hypothesis-free, data-driven approach reliably predicting (or not) the development of AAE and the cognitive and behavioral outcome in the due course of an individual patient´s disease.
• These studies should be experimentally validated in suitable animal models.
Abstract
The current International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) definition and classification guidelines for the first time introduced the category of immune-mediated focal epilepsy in addition to structural, genetic, infectious, and metabolic aetiologies. Moreover, the ILAE Autoimmunity and Inflammation Taskforce recently provided a conceptual framework for the distinction between acute “provoked” seizures in the acute phase of autoimmune encephalitis from chronic “unprovoked” seizures due to autoimmune-associated epilepsy. The first category predominately applies to those autoimmune encephalitis patients with autoantibodies against cell surface neural antigens, in whom autoantibodies are assumed to exert a direct ictogenic effect without overt structural damage. These patients do not exhibit enduring predisposition to seizures after the “acute phase” encephalitis, and thus do not fulfil the definition of epilepsy. The second category applies to those autoimmune encephalitis patients with autoantibodies against intracellular neural antigens and Rasmussen's encephalitis, in whom T cells are assumed to cause epileptogenic effects through immune-inflammation and overt structural damage. These patients do exhibit enduring predisposition to seizures after the “acute phase” of encephalitis and thus fulfil the definition of epilepsy. AAE may result from both, ongoing brain autoimmunity and associated structural brain damage according to the current ILAE definition and classification guideline. We here discuss the shortcomings and defaults of this concept and suggest an unbiased translationally validated and data-driven approach to predict in an individual encephalitis patient the propensity to develop (or not) AAE and the cognitive and behavioural outcome.
Diese S2k-Leitlinie (LL) zum Status epilepticus (SE) im Erwachsenenalter schreibt die letzte DGN-LL zum SE von 2012 fort. Neue Definitionen und Evidenz wurden bei der Erstellung der LL und des Clinical Pathway berücksichtigt. Jeder epileptische Anfall, der länger als 5 Minuten anhält (oder ≥ 2 Anfälle über einen Zeitraum von mehr als 5 Minuten ohne Wiedererlangen des neurologischen Ausgangsstatus), soll als SE behandelt werden.
In der Diagnostik sollte initial eine CCT oder, wenn möglich, eine MRT erfolgen. Das EEG spielt bei der Diagnosestellung und beim Therapiemonitoring von non-konvulsiven SE und zum Ausschluss bzw. Nachweis psychogener nichtepileptischer Anfälle eine wesentliche Rolle. Der prognostische Einfluss von insbesondere entzündlichen Begleiterkrankungen (z. B. Pneumonie) wurde besser belegt, weshalb entsprechende Laborparameter auch im Verlauf kontrolliert werden sollten und ggf. frühzeitig eine antibiotische Therapie initiiert werden sollte.
Die Therapie erfolgt in 4 Stufen: 1. Initialer SE: Gabe eines ausreichend hoch dosierten Benzodiazepins i. m., i. v. oder i. n.; 2. Benzodiazepin-refraktärer SE: 1. Wahl ist die i.v. Gabe von Levetiracetam oder Valproat; 3. Refraktärer SE (RSE) und 4. Superrefraktärer SE (SRSE): I.v. Propofol oder Midazolam alleine oder in Kombination oder Thiopental in anästhetischen Dosen. Beim fokalen non-konvulsiven RSE kann unter Umständen auf die Einleitung eines therapeutischen Komas verzichtet werden. Bei SRSE sollte die ketogene Diät zum Einsatz kommen. I.v. Ketamin oder inhalatives Isofluran kann erwogen werden. In Einzelfällen kann die elektrokonvulsive Therapie und, bei resektabler epileptogener Zone, ein Epilepsie chirurgischer Eingriff erwogen werden. I.v. Allopregnanolon oder die Hyperthermie sollen nicht eingesetzt werden.