Efficacy of Home Anticonvulsant Administration for Second-Line Status Epilepticus Treatment

Neurology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 10.1212/WNL.0000000000012414
Author(s):  
Rafael Wabl ◽  
Samuel W Terman ◽  
Maria Kwok ◽  
Jordan Elm ◽  
James Chamberlain ◽  
...  

Objective:To investigate whether receiving a second-line anticonvulsant medication that is part of a patient’s home regimen influences outcomes in benzodiazepine-refractory convulsive status epilepticus.Methods:Using the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) data, allocation to a study drug included in the patient’s home anticonvulsant medication regimen was compared to receipt of an alternative second-line study medication. The primary outcome was cessation of clinical seizures with improved consciousness by 60 minutes after study drug initiation. Secondary outcomes were seizure cessation adjudicated from medical records and adverse events. We performed inverse probability of treatment-weighted [IPTW] logistic regressions.Results:Of 462 patients, 232 (50%) were taking 1-2 of the 3 study medications at home. The primary outcome was observed in 39/89 (44%) patients allocated to their home medication versus 76/143 (53%) allocated to a non-home medication (IPTW odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-1.14). The adjudicated outcome occurred in 37/89 (42%) patients versus 82/143 (57%) respectively (IPTW OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.30-0.89). There was no interaction between study levetiracetam and home levetiracetam and there were no differences in adverse events.Conclusion:There was no difference in the primary outcome for patients who received a home medication versus non-home medication. However, the retrospective evaluation suggested an association between receiving a non-home medication and seizure cessation.Classification of Evidence:This study provides Class II evidence that for patients with refractory convulsive status epilepticus, use of a home second-line anticonvulsant compared to a non-home anticonvulsant did not significantly affect the probability of stopping seizures.

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (58) ◽  
pp. 1-96
Author(s):  
Richard E Appleton ◽  
Naomi EA Rainford ◽  
Carrol Gamble ◽  
Shrouk Messahel ◽  
Amy Humphreys ◽  
...  

Background Convulsive status epilepticus is the most common neurological emergency in children. Its management is important to avoid or minimise neurological morbidity and death. The current first-choice second-line drug is phenytoin (Epanutin, Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA), for which there is no robust scientific evidence. Objective To determine whether phenytoin or levetiracetam (Keppra, UCB Pharma, Brussels, Belgium) is the more clinically effective intravenous second-line treatment of paediatric convulsive status epilepticus and to help better inform its management. Design A multicentre parallel-group randomised open-label superiority trial with a nested mixed-method study to assess recruitment and research without prior consent. Setting Participants were recruited from 30 paediatric emergency departments in the UK. Participants Participants aged 6 months to 17 years 11 months, who were presenting with convulsive status epilepticus and were failing to respond to first-line treatment. Interventions Intravenous levetiracetam (40 mg/kg) or intravenous phenytoin (20 mg/kg). Main outcome measures Primary outcome – time from randomisation to cessation of all visible signs of convulsive status epilepticus. Secondary outcomes – further anticonvulsants to manage the convulsive status epilepticus after the initial agent, the need for rapid sequence induction owing to ongoing convulsive status epilepticus, admission to critical care and serious adverse reactions. Results Between 17 July 2015 and 7 April 2018, 286 participants were randomised, treated and consented. A total of 152 participants were allocated to receive levetiracetam and 134 participants to receive phenytoin. Convulsive status epilepticus was terminated in 106 (70%) participants who were allocated to levetiracetam and 86 (64%) participants who were allocated to phenytoin. Median time from randomisation to convulsive status epilepticus cessation was 35 (interquartile range 20–not assessable) minutes in the levetiracetam group and 45 (interquartile range 24–not assessable) minutes in the phenytoin group (hazard ratio 1.20, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.60; p = 0.2). Results were robust to prespecified sensitivity analyses, including time from treatment commencement to convulsive status epilepticus termination and competing risks. One phenytoin-treated participant experienced serious adverse reactions. Limitations First, this was an open-label trial. A blinded design was considered too complex, in part because of the markedly different infusion rates of the two drugs. Second, there was subjectivity in the assessment of ‘cessation of all signs of continuous, rhythmic clonic activity’ as the primary outcome, rather than fixed time points to assess convulsive status epilepticus termination. However, site training included simulated demonstration of seizure cessation. Third, the time point of randomisation resulted in convulsive status epilepticus termination prior to administration of trial treatment in some cases. This affected both treatment arms equally and had been prespecified at the design stage. Last, safety measures were a secondary outcome, but the trial was not powered to demonstrate difference in serious adverse reactions between treatment groups. Conclusions Levetiracetam was not statistically superior to phenytoin in convulsive status epilepticus termination rate, time taken to terminate convulsive status epilepticus or frequency of serious adverse reactions. The results suggest that it may be an alternative to phenytoin in the second-line management of paediatric convulsive status epilepticus. Simple trial design, bespoke site training and effective leadership were found to facilitate practitioner commitment to the trial and its success. We provide a framework to optimise recruitment discussions in paediatric emergency medicine trials. Future work Future work should include a meta-analysis of published studies and the possible sequential use of levetiracetam and phenytoin or sodium valproate in the second-line treatment of paediatric convulsive status epilepticus. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN22567894 and European Clinical Trials Database EudraCT number 2014-002188-13. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 58. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kensuke Nakamura ◽  
◽  
Aiki Marushima ◽  
Yuji Takahashi ◽  
Akio Kimura ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Status epilepticus (SE) is an emergency condition for which rapid and secured cessation is important. Phenytoin and fosphenytoin, the prodrug of phenytoin with less severe adverse effects, have been recommended as second-line treatments. However, fosphenytoin causes severe adverse events, such as hypotension and arrhythmia. Levetiracetam reportedly has similar efficacy and higher safety for SE; however, evidence to support its use for adult SE is lacking. In the present study, a non-inferiority designed multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) is being conducted to compare levetiracetam with fosphenytoin after diazepam as a second-line treatment for SE. Methods This multicenter, prospective, and open-label RCT is conducted in emergency departments. Between December 23, 2019, and March 31, 2023, 176 patients with convulsive SE transported to an emergency room will be randomized into a fosphenytoin group and levetiracetam group at a ratio of 1:1. The definition of SE is “continuous seizures longer than 5 min or discrete seizures longer than 2 min with intervening consciousness disturbance.” In both groups, diazepam is initially administered at 1–20 mg, followed by intravenous fosphenytoin at 22.5 mg/kg or intravenous levetiracetam at 1000–3000 mg. The primary outcome is the seizure cessation rate within 30 min. Seizure recurrence within 24 h, severe adverse events, and intubation rate within 24 h are secondary outcomes. Discussion The present study was approved and conducted as an initiative study of the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine. If non-inferiority is identified, the society will pursue an application for the national health insurance coverage of levetiracetam for SE via a public knowledge-based application. Trial registration Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCTs031190160. Registered on December 13, 2019


Seizure ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 81 ◽  
pp. 263-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven P. Trau ◽  
Emily C. Sterrett ◽  
Lydia Feinstein ◽  
Linh Tran ◽  
William B. Gallentine ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Jo Marie. B. Sourbron ◽  
Lieven Lagae ◽  
Dalila Ibrahimo Sulemane

Background: Optimal care of Convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) can be related to multiple barriers in resource-limited countries. Objectives and methods: Since limited data of CSE management are available from South-East Africa, we performed a retrospective analysis of the electronic records of pediatric patients with CSE admitted to the Maputo Central hospital from January 2016 until April 2019. Results: Our database consisted out of 39 patients. The average age was 5.15 (range 0.3-13.8) years and demographic characteristics did not show a relation to CSE characteristics or outcomes. However, the total stay in the hospital was negatively correlated with age (p=0.0314). Moreover, 14 patients needed to be admitted to the IC, which was correlated to having generalized motor seizures (p=0.0253), and a relatively higher need for a second AED to control their CSE (p=0.0131). Regarding AED use, the first AED was a IV benzodiazepine (BZD: midazolam (MIDA) or diazepam (DIAZ)) or IV phenytoin (PHEN) when BZDs were not available. There was no statistically significant difference between the efficacy of MIDA vs. DIAZ. Eleven patients received PHEN as a second-line drug, of which only two patients needed an additional dose of PHEN. None of the patients died and five patients (13.2%) had an extra comorbidity after CSE. Conclusions: Although limited AEDs were available in our study, compared to more AEDs in other developing and developed countries, we report the successful cessation of CSE in the majority of cases. We recommend strategies to improve prehospital management such as the use of non-IV BZD use, to limit the need for patients to be admitted to the IC and thereby potentially decreasing the number of AEDs, morbidity and hospital duration. Moreover, our data underline the conversion to second-line AEDs (PHEN) to be adequate in nearly all patients.


The Lancet ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 393 (10186) ◽  
pp. 2125-2134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark D Lyttle ◽  
Naomi E A Rainford ◽  
Carrol Gamble ◽  
Shrouk Messahel ◽  
Amy Humphreys ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document