Newer Antiepileptic Drugs for Status Epilepticus in Adults: What's the Evidence?

Critical Care Management of Patients After Cardiac Arrest: A Scientific Statement from the American Heart Association and Neurocritical Care Society

The critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest is burdened by a lack of high-quality clinical studies and the resultant lack of high-certainty evidence. This results in limited practice guideline recommendations, which may lead to uncertainty and variability in management. Critical care management is crucial in patients after cardiac arrest and affects outcome. Although guidelines address some relevant topics (including temperature control and neurological prognostication of comatose survivors, 2 topics for which there are more robust clinical studies), many important subject areas have limited or nonexistent clinical studies, leading to the absence of guidelines or low-certainty evidence. The American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the Neurocritical Care Society collaborated to address this gap by organizing an expert consensus panel and conference. Twenty-four experienced practitioners (including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and a respiratory therapist) from multiple medical specialties, levels, institutions, and countries made up the panel. Topics were identified and prioritized by the panel and arranged by organ system to facilitate discussion, debate, and consensus building. Statements related to postarrest management were generated, and 80% agreement was required to approve a statement. Voting was anonymous and web based. Topics addressed include neurological, cardiac, pulmonary, hematological, infectious, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and general critical care management. Areas of uncertainty, areas for which no consensus was reached, and future research directions are also included. Until high-quality studies that inform practice guidelines in these areas are available, the expert panel consensus statements that are provided can advise clinicians on the critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest.

Critical Care Management of Patients After Cardiac Arrest: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and Neurocritical Care Society

The critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest is burdened by a lack of high-quality clinical studies and the resultant lack of high-certainty evidence. This results in limited practice guideline recommendations, which may lead to uncertainty and variability in management. Critical care management is crucial in patients after cardiac arrest and affects outcome. Although guidelines address some relevant topics (including temperature control and neurological prognostication of comatose survivors, 2 topics for which there are more robust clinical studies), many important subject areas have limited or nonexistent clinical studies, leading to the absence of guidelines or low-certainty evidence. The American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the Neurocritical Care Society collaborated to address this gap by organizing an expert consensus panel and conference. Twenty-four experienced practitioners (including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and a respiratory therapist) from multiple medical specialties, levels, institutions, and countries made up the panel. Topics were identified and prioritized by the panel and arranged by organ system to facilitate discussion, debate, and consensus building. Statements related to postarrest management were generated, and 80% agreement was required to approve a statement. Voting was anonymous and web based. Topics addressed include neurological, cardiac, pulmonary, hematological, infectious, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and general critical care management. Areas of uncertainty, areas for which no consensus was reached, and future research directions are also included. Until high-quality studies that inform practice guidelines in these areas are available, the expert panel consensus statements that are provided can advise clinicians on the critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest.

Trends and Differences in Status Epilepticus Treatment of Children and Adults Over 10 Years: A Comparative Study of Medical Records (2012-2021) from a University Hospital in Germany

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Over the last decade, significant advancements have been made in status epilepticus (SE) management, influenced by landmark trials such as ESETT and RAMPART. The objectives of this study were to explore the evolution of drug treatments for patients with SE, to investigate its association with outcomes and mortality, and to evaluate differences in treatment patterns between adults and children for a potential shift in medication trends due to the above mentioned trials.

METHODS

The medical records of patients with SE treated at University Hospital Frankfurt between 2012 and 2021 were evaluated for medication trends and outcomes. Children and adults were analyzed separately and jointly.

RESULTS

This study included 1151 SE episodes in 1021 patients (mean age = 53.3 ± 28.3 years; 52.5 % female [n = 533]). The overall percentage of patients with SE treated prehospital was stable over the last decade. More than half (53.6 %) of children were treated prehospital, compared with less than one-third (26.7 %) of adults. Prehospital midazolam use increased over time, while diazepam use decreased. Lorazepam was the most commonly used benzodiazepine in hospitals in 2012-2013, used in 40.8 % of all episodes. However, its use declined to 27.2 % in 2020-2021, while midazolam use increased to 44.0 %. While the use of older antiseizure medications (ASMs) such as phenobarbital (p = 0.02), phenytoin (p < 0.001), and valproate (p < 0.001) decreased, the use of newer ASMs such as levetiracetam and lacosamide significantly increased (p < 0.001). Propofol and continuous midazolam infusion remained the most used third-line therapy drugs. Overall mortality was 16.5 % at discharge and 18.9 % at 30 days. Mortality rates did not change between 2012 and 2021.

CONCLUSION

Midazolam has become the preferred benzodiazepine in pre- and in-hospital settings, both in children and adults. The same applies to the increased use of levetiracetam and lacosamide over time in children and adults, while phenobarbital, phenytoin, and valproate use decreased. Continuous midazolam infusion and propofol remain the most frequently used anesthetic drugs. Mortality and outcome remain stable despite changes in medication patterns.

Update on Antiseizure Medications 2022

EDITORS NOTE

The article "Update on Antiseizure Medications 2022" by Dr Abou-Khalil was first published in the February 2016 Epilepsy issue of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology as "Antiepileptic Drugs," and at the request of the Editor-in-Chief was updated by Dr Abou-Khalil for the 2019 issue and again for this issue.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Second- and Third-Generation Antiepileptic Drugs: Insights From a College of American Pathologists Proficiency Testing Survey

CONTEXT.—

Therapeutic drug monitoring has traditionally been widely used for first-generation antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) such as carbamazepine and phenytoin. The last 2 decades have seen the introduction of second- and third-generation AEDs (eg, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate) into clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE.—

To use data from the College of American Pathologists Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, Extended proficiency testing survey to determine the performance of assays used for therapeutic drug monitoring of newer AEDs, including comparison of enzyme immunoassay and chromatographic techniques.

DESIGN.—

Six years of proficiency testing surveys were reviewed (2013-2018).

RESULTS.—

Steady growth was seen in participant volumes for newer AEDs. The analytical performance of automated enzyme immunoassays for lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate was similar to that of chromatographic methods, consistent with published literature using patient samples for comparisons. The majority of participating laboratories now use enzyme immunoassays to measure levetiracetam.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Survey results reflect steadily growing interest in therapeutic drug monitoring of newer AEDs. The increasing availability of robust immunoassays for new AEDs should facilitate their clinical utility, especially for clinical laboratories that do not perform chromatographic assays for therapeutic drug monitoring.

Update on the management of status epilepticus

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Randomized controlled trials investigating the initial pharmacological treatment of status epilepticus have been recently published. Furthermore, status epilepticus arising in comatose survivors after cardiac arrest has received increasing attention in the last years. This review offers an updated assessment of status epilepticus treatment in these different scenarios.

RECENT FINDINGS

Initial benzodiazepines underdosing is common and correlates with development of status epilepticus refractoriness. The recently published ESETT trial provides high-level evidence regarding the equivalence of fosphenytoin, valproate, and levetiracetam as a second-line option. Myoclonus or epileptiform transients on electroencephalography occur in up to 1/3 of patients surviving a cardiac arrest. Contrary to previous assumptions regarding an almost invariable association with death, at least 1/10 of them may awaken with reasonably good prognosis, if treated. Multimodal prognostication including clinical examination, EEG, somatosensory evoked potentials, biochemical markers, and neuroimaging help identifying patients with a chance to recover consciousness, in whom a trial with antimyoclonic compounds and at times general anesthetics is indicated.

SUMMARY

There is a continuous, albeit relatively slow progress in knowledge regarding different aspect of status epilepticus; recent findings refine some treatment strategies and help improving patients' outcomes. Further high-quality studies are clearly needed to further improve the management of these patients, especially those with severe, refractory status epilepticus forms.

Treatment of established status epilepticus in the elderly - a study protocol for a prospective multicenter double-blind comparative effectiveness trial (ToSEE)

BACKGROUND

Status epilepticus (SE) is a common neurological emergency condition that especially affects the elderly and old population. Older people with SE frequently have non-convulsive SE (NCSE) and are also at special risk of suffering a poor outcome. The application of benzodiazepines fails to control SE in about one third of the cases. For benzodiazepine refractory SE (BRSE) in elderly, there is little evidence that would justify the choice of one of the commonly used antiepileptic drugs. The present study aims to generate evidence for the treatment of BRSE in this age group.

METHODS

We will conduct a prospective, randomized, double-blind comparative effectiveness study in more than twenty hospitals in Germany over a four-year period. Four hundred and seventy-seven elderly patients (≥ 65 years old) diagnosed with BRSE will be allocated by 1:1 randomization to receive either levetiracetam or valproate. All types of SE will be considered. For the diagnosis NCSE a verification by EEG is required. Levetiracetam or valproate will be administered in one single infusion. The primary endpoint is the stable cessation of ictal activity 15 min after the start of infusion persisting for the following 45 min of observation. EEG recording is maintained over the whole observation period, clinical examinations are conducted in predefined intervals. In case of treatment success patients and study staff remain blinded until 60 min after the start of the infusion. Adverse events will be recorded until the end of the study. EEG data will be reviewed by two external independent experts. To obtain data about the further treatment of SE, intrahospital complications and the functional outcome in the short term the study participants will be observed until the day of discharge or day 30 whichever is earliest.

DISCUSSION

ToSEE is the first study which shall deliver evidence for the SE-therapy in the elderly and old population in a controlled prospective comparator study. By design it also shall collect information about therapy regimes and outcome aspects of this disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial has been registered at the German Clinical Trials Register on 3 July, 2020 ( DRKS00022308 ,  https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00022308 ).

Status epilepticus - time is brain and treatment considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Status epilepticus is a neurological emergency associated with high morbidity and mortality. There is a lack of robust data to guide the management of this neurological emergency beyond the initial treatment. This review examines recent literature on treatment considerations including the choice of continuous anesthetics or adjunctive anticonvulsant, the cause of the status epilepticus, and use of nonpharmacologic therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Status epilepticus remains undertreated and mortality persists to be unchanged over the past 30 years. New anticonvulsant choices, such as levetiracetam and lacosamide have been explored as alternative emergent therapies. Anecdotal reports on the use of other generation anticonvulsants and nonpharmacologic therapies for the treatment of refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus have been described.Finally, recent evidence has examined etiology-guided management of status epilepticus in certain patient populations, such as immune-mediated, paraneoplastic or infectious encephalitis and anoxic brain injury.

SUMMARY

Randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the role for newer generation anticonvulsants and nonpharmacologic modalities for the treatment of epilepticus remains and evaluate the long-term outcomes associated with continuous anesthetics.

Update on Antiepileptic Drugs 2019

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article is an update from the article on antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy published in the last Continuum issue on epilepsy and is intended to cover the vast majority of agents currently available to the neurologist in the management of patients with epilepsy. Treatment of epilepsy starts with AED monotherapy. Knowledge of the spectrum of efficacy, clinical pharmacology, and modes of use for individual AEDs is essential for optimal treatment for epilepsy. This article addresses AEDs individually, focusing on key pharmacokinetic characteristics, indications, and modes of use.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since the previous version of this article was published, three new AEDs, brivaracetam, cannabidiol, and stiripentol, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and ezogabine was removed from the market because of decreased use as a result of bluish skin pigmentation and concern over potential retinal toxicity.Older AEDs are effective but have tolerability and pharmacokinetic disadvantages. Several newer AEDs have undergone comparative trials demonstrating efficacy equal to and tolerability at least equal to or better than older AEDs as first-line therapy. The list includes lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, levetiracetam, topiramate, zonisamide, and lacosamide. Pregabalin was found to be less effective than lamotrigine. Lacosamide, pregabalin, and eslicarbazepine have undergone successful trials of conversion to monotherapy. Other newer AEDs with a variety of mechanisms of action are suitable for adjunctive therapy. Most recently, the FDA adopted a policy that a drug's efficacy as adjunctive therapy in adults can be extrapolated to efficacy in monotherapy. In addition, efficacy in adults can be extrapolated for efficacy in children 4 years of age and older. Both extrapolations require data demonstrating that an AED has equivalent pharmacokinetics between its original approved use and its extrapolated use. In addition, the safety of the drug in pediatric patients has to be demonstrated in clinical studies that can be open label. Rational AED combinations should avoid AEDs with unfavorable pharmacokinetic interactions or pharmacodynamic interactions related to mechanism of action.

SUMMARY

Knowledge of AED pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and tolerability profiles facilitates the choice of appropriate AED therapy for patients with epilepsy.

[Management of refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus]

If status epilepticus continues despite the use of intravenous antiepileptic drugs or narcotics, it is called "refractory" or "super-refractory" status epilepticus (RSE, SRSE). Prolonged seizure activity is associated with neuronal damage, systemic complications and mortality rates of up to 50%, especially in generalized tonic clonic seizure types. In order to terminate the status, several rescue interventions with drugs and other measures are available. However, their evidence base is low because the effectiveness of the measures was almost exclusively derived from case reports and case series. In individual cases, a good outcome is possible even after several months of ongoing SRSE.

Nose-to-brain delivery of levetiracetam after intranasal administration to mice

Despite being one of the most commonly prescribed antiepileptic drugs, levetiracetam is marketed in oral and intravenous dosage forms, which are associated to drug-drug interactions and drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). The purpose of the present study was to assess the potential of the intranasal route to deliver levetiracetam into the brain, due to the particular anatomical features of the nasal cavity. After development and characterization of the drug formulation, a thermoreversible gel loaded with levetiracetam was administered to CD-1 male mice by intranasal route and its pharmacokinetics compared to those observed after intravenous administration. Similar plasma pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained and the intranasal absolute bioavailability was 107.44%, underscoring that a high drug fraction was systemically absorbed. In brain tissue, maximum drug concentrations were 4.48 and 4.02 μg/g (intranasal vs intravenous) and the mean cerebral concentrations were significantly higher after intranasal administration. The percentage of drug targeting efficiency was 182.35% while direct transport percentage was 46.38%, suggesting that almost 50% of levetiracetam undergoes direct nose-to-brain delivery. Complementarily, an in vivo intranasal repeated dose toxicity study was performed and no relevant histopathological alterations were observed. The herein proposed non-invasive and safe intranasal administration route allowed a direct nose-to-brain delivery of levetiracetam and is a promising strategy for the treatment of DRE.

Use of Newer Anticonvulsants for the Treatment of Status Epilepticus

Status epilepticus (SE) has a high mortality rate and is one of the most common neurologic emergencies. Fast progression of this neurologic emergency and lack of response to traditional antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in most cases has challenged clinicians to use new agents. This article evaluates the efficacy and safety of AEDs released to the market after 2000 for SE, refractory status epilepticus (RSE), and super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE). The PubMed database was searched for clinical trials published between January 2000 and July 2018 using the search terms status epilepticus, refractory status epilepticus, super refractory status epilepticus, brivaracetam, clobazam, cannabidiol, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, perampanel, rufinamide, stiripentol, and zonisamide. Trials that evaluated these agents in adults with SE, RSE, and SRSE were included. Brivaracetam use was identified in two retrospective reviews with success rates of 27% and 57%. One unsuccessful case report of cannabidiol use in SE was found. Four clobazam studies were identified in SE and RSE with success rates ranging from 25-100%. No evidence for the use of eslicarbazepine and zonisamide was found. Using the search terms for lacosamide identified 38 articles: 1 systematic review, 5 prospective studies, 15 retrospective reviews, and 17 case reports. Success rates and dosing varied, but studies that included focal or partial types of SE showed higher success rates. Five articles were identified regarding perampanel use in this setting. Three were retrospective reviews with success rates ranging from 17-60%, and two were case reports. Only one case report regarding the use of rufinamide was found; rufinamide titrated up to 4.4 mg/day allowed discontinuation of barbiturate and clobazam. One case report and two case series of stiripentol were found with reported efficacy between 60% and 100% in SRSE. Evidence is currently insufficient to support the use of these agents in this setting.

Use of Emergency Medication in Adult Patients with Epilepsy: A Multicentre Cohort Study from Germany

BACKGROUND

Emergency treatment with benzodiazepines is indicated in prolonged seizures, seizure clusters and status epilepticus.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of emergency medication in adult patients with epilepsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All adult epilepsy patients attending the epilepsy outpatient clinics of the university hospitals in Frankfurt and Marburg in 2015 were asked to participate in this questionnaire-based, retrospective survey.

RESULTS

A total of 481 patients with a mean age of 43.4 years (range 18-94 years, 54% female) participated in the study. Among them, 134 patients (27.9%) reported on the prescription of an emergency medication during the last year. Patients receiving emergency medication were younger and exhibited a lower age at epilepsy onset, a higher seizure frequency and a higher number of regularly taken antiepileptic drugs. The most frequently taken emergency drugs were oral lorazepam tablets (65.7%; n = 88 out of 134), followed by buccal midazolam (23.9%, n = 32) and rectal diazepam (17.9%, n = 24). The most common indications for administering the emergency medication were seizures continuing for several minutes (35.1%, n = 47), but almost the same number of patients (33.6%, n = 45) stated that the rescue medication was given during or after every seizure. Regarding adverse events, sedation was named as a major (18.7%, n = 25) or moderate (29.1%; n = 39) problem by a substantial number of patients. Difficulties in administration were reported by 17 (13%) patients. Two-thirds assessed the efficacy of their emergency medication as good (50.7%, n = 68) or as very good (15.7%, n = 21). For multivariate logistic regression analysis, aspects such as young age at onset, active epilepsy, structural etiology, presence of generalised tonic-clonic seizures, past medical history of status epilepticus and living with another person independently predicted prescription of emergency medication.

CONCLUSIONS

In most cases, unsuitable benzodiazepines with slow absorption due to oral administration were prescribed, or buccal midazolam solution was used off-label in adults. Furthermore, inappropriate use of emergency medication at every seizure was reported by a substantial number of participating patients.