Levetiracetam in children with refractory status epilepticus

Rectal use of levetiracetam: best practice report for a stepwise approach for sustainable off-label decision making and treatment

Off-label drug use is common practice in palliative care. It may pose a risk to the patient and benefit should outweigh harm. A decision and documentation aid for off-label use was developed to support practitioners in clinical practice off-label use. Using the example of the rectal administration of levetiracetam in three patient cases, the utilisation and benefits of the decision and documentation aid are presented and discussed. The rectal administration of levetiracetam clearly is an experimental treatment approach with little underlying evidence. To support and document the decision-making process for or against such an off-label use in clinical practice, it is helpful to have a structured approach in order to make this data comprehensible for a later point in time. Off-label use may be a permissible treatment alternative without underlying evidence, provided it takes place in a well-planned and well-monitored therapeutic setting and the benefits outweigh the potential risks.

Comparative Efficacy of IV Phenytoin, IV Valproate, and IV Levetiracetam in Childhood Status Epilepticus

Background and Purpose

Status epilepticus (SE) is a common pediatric neurological emergency that requires immediate and vigorous management. Currently, phenytoin is the most common agent used in the setting of SE following benzodiazepine for further seizure prevention. Other drugs recently introduced for management of SE are valproic acid and levetiracetam.

Methods

This prospective randomized study included 150 pediatric patients admitted as SE. Patients were randomized into three equal groups (50 each) to receive one of the three anticonvulsants in addition to standard treatment. Patients were monitored in hospital regarding their vitals, time to regain consciousness, and seizure recurrence.

Results

At 24 hours seizures were controlled in 44 patients (88%) in phenytoin group, 39 patients (78%) in levetiracetam (LEV) group and 46 patients (92%) in valproate (VAL) group (p=0.115). The mean time to regain consciousness in phenytoin, LEV and VAL groups was 122.3±45.4, 120.8±42.8, and 75.0±30.7 minutes (mean±standard deviation) respectively. Patients in VAL group regained consciousness earlier than both phenytoin and LEV group patients (p<0.0001). At 3 months follow-up, seven (14.28%) out of 49 patients in phenytoin group, 14 (28.57%) out of 49 in LEV group and two (4%) out of 50 patients in VAL group had a seizure recurrence (p=0.0032).

Conclusions

In our study we found that both IV LEV and IV VAL safe and efficacious. The primary outcome, seizure recurrence at 24 hours, did not show a statistically significant difference in three groups (p>0.05). Also, seizure recurrence at 1 week did not reach a statistically significant difference. However, time to regain consciousness and seizure recurrence at 3 months was significantly less in VAL group (p<0.05).

Treatment of Refractory Convulsive Status Epilepticus: A Comprehensive Review by the American Epilepsy Society Treatments Committee

Purpose:

Established tonic–clonic status epilepticus (SE) does not stop in one-third of patients when treated with an intravenous (IV) benzodiazepine bolus followed by a loading dose of a second antiseizure medication (ASM). These patients have refractory status epilepticus (RSE) and a high risk of morbidity and death. For patients with convulsive refractory status epilepticus (CRSE), we sought to determine the strength of evidence for 8 parenteral ASMs used as third-line treatment in stopping clinical CRSE.

Methods:

A structured literature search (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL) was performed to identify original studies on the treatment of CRSE in children and adults using IV brivaracetam, ketamine, lacosamide, levetiracetam (LEV), midazolam (MDZ), pentobarbital (PTB; and thiopental), propofol (PRO), and valproic acid (VPA). Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), magnesium sulfate, and pyridoxine were added to determine the effectiveness in treating hard-to-control seizures in special circumstances. Studies were evaluated by predefined criteria and were classified by strength of evidence in stopping clinical CRSE (either as the last ASM added or compared to another ASM) according to the 2017 American Academy of Neurology process.

Results:

No studies exist on the use of ACTH, corticosteroids, or IVIg for the treatment of CRSE. Small series and case reports exist on the use of these agents in the treatment of RSE of suspected immune etiology, severe epileptic encephalopathies, and rare epilepsy syndromes. For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists on the effectiveness of brivaracetam (level U; 4 class IV studies). For children and adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists on the effectiveness of ketamine (level U; 25 class IV studies). For children and adults with CRSE, it is possible that lacosamide is effective at stopping RSE (level C; 2 class III, 14 class IV studies). For children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists that LEV and VPA are equally effective (level U, 1 class III study). For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support the effectiveness of LEV (level U; 2 class IV studies). Magnesium sulfate may be effective in the treatment of eclampsia, but there are only case reports of its use for CRSE. For children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support either that MDZ and diazepam infusions are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study) or that MDZ infusion and PTB are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study). For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support either that MDZ infusion and PRO are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study) or that low-dose and high-dose MDZ infusions are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study). For children and adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that MDZ is effective as the last drug added (level U; 29 class IV studies). For adults with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that PTB and PRO are equally effective (level U; 1 class III study). For adults and children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that PTB is effective as the last ASM added (level U; 42 class IV studies). For CRSE, insufficient evidence exists to support that PRO is effective as the last ASM used (level U; 26 class IV studies). No pediatric-only studies exist on the use of PRO for CRSE, and many guidelines do not recommend its use in children aged <16 years. Pyridoxine-dependent and pyridoxine-responsive epilepsies should be considered in children presenting between birth and age 3 years with refractory seizures and no imaging lesion or other acquired cause of seizures. For children with CRSE, insufficient evidence exists that VPA and diazepam infusion are equally effective (level U, 1 class III study). No class I to III studies have been reported in adults treated with VPA for CRSE. In comparison, for children and adults with established convulsive SE (ie, not RSE), after an initial benzodiazepine, it is likely that loading doses of LEV 60 mg/kg, VPA 40 mg/kg, and fosphenytoin 20 mg PE/kg are equally effective at stopping SE (level B, 1 class I study).

Conclusions:

Mostly insufficient evidence exists on the efficacy of stopping clinical CRSE using brivaracetam, lacosamide, LEV, valproate, ketamine, MDZ, PTB, and PRO either as the last ASM or compared to others of these drugs. Adrenocorticotropic hormone, IVIg, corticosteroids, magnesium sulfate, and pyridoxine have been used in special situations but have not been studied for CRSE. For the treatment of established convulsive SE (ie, not RSE), LEV, VPA, and fosphenytoin are likely equally effective, but whether this is also true for CRSE is unknown. Triple-masked, randomized controlled trials are needed to compare the effectiveness of parenteral anesthetizing and nonanesthetizing ASMs in the treatment of CRSE.

Efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam for pediatric refractory epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Levetiracetam has a high tolerability and is effective against various seizure types and epilepsy syndromes. However, no study has specifically evaluated the efficacy of levetiracetam in children with refractory epilepsy based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings and the presence of intellectual disability (ID).

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated levetiracetam efficacy and safety in 49 pediatric patients who met the following inclusion criteria: (1) diagnosis of refractory epilepsy with first-line antiepileptic (AED) treatment ⩾2years, (2) younger than 20years old, and (3) received oral levetiracetam treatment for ⩾6months. We assessed the relationships of these outcomes with MRI findings and ID status.

RESULTS

Eighteen (37%) patients achieved a ⩾50% reduction in seizure frequency, and the majority (78%) had no remarkable side effects. Twenty-two (45%) patients had previously been treated with more than seven antiepileptic drugs prior to levetiracetam. Among 18 patients who achieved a ⩾50% reduction in seizure frequency, 13 and 5 had negative and positive MRI findings, and 9 and 9 had and did not have ID, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that even for intractable pediatric cases with symptomatic etiology (i.e., MRI lesion and ID), levetiracetam has favorable efficacy for refractory epilepsy with tolerable adverse effects.

A Comparison of Intravenous Levetiracetam and Valproate for the Treatment of Refractory Status Epilepticus in Children

Because of the lack of studies comparing the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam and valproate before the induction of general anesthesia in the treatment of convulsive refractory status epilepticus in children, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of these antiepileptic drugs in patients with convulsive status epilepticus admitted to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit between 2011 and 2014. Forty-six (59%) of the 78 patients received levetiracetam, and 32 (41%) received valproate for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus. The response rate was not significantly different between the 2 groups. Although no adverse event was noted in patients who received levetiracetam, 4 (12.5%) patients in the valproate group experienced liver dysfunction (P = .025). According to our results, levetiracetam and valproate may be used in the treatment of refractory status epilepticus before the induction of general anesthesia. Levetiracetam appears as effective as valproate, and also safer.

Management of Status Epilepticus in Children

Status epilepticus is a common pediatric neurological emergency. Management includes prompt administration of appropriately selected anti-seizure medications, identification and treatment of seizure precipitant(s), as well as identification and management of associated systemic complications. This review discusses the definitions, classification, epidemiology and management of status epilepticus and refractory status epilepticus in children.

Intravenous levetiracetam in critically ill children

Background:

To report the effectiveness and safety of intravenous (IV) levetiracetam (LEV) in the treatment of critically ill children with acute repetitive seizures and status epilepticus (SE) in a children's hospital.

Materials and Methods:

We retrospectively analyzed data from children treated with IV LEV.

Results:

The mean age of the 108 children was 69.39 ± 46.14 months (1-192 months). There were 58 (53.1%) males and 50 (46.8%) females. LEV load dose was 28.33 ± 4.60 mg/kg/dose (10-40 mg/kg). Out of these 108 patients, LEV terminated seizures in 79 (73.1%). No serious adverse effects were observed but agitation and aggression were developed in two patients, and mild erythematous rash and urticaria developed in one patient.

Conclusion:

Antiepileptic treatment of critically ill children with IV LEV seems to be effective and safe. Further study is needed to elucidate the role of IV LEV in critically ill children.

Intravenous levetiracetam in Thai children and adolescents with status epilepticus and acute repetitive seizures

BACKGROUND

Intravenous levetiracetam is an option for treatment of status epilepticus (SE) and acute repetitive seizures (ARS). However, there have been relatively few studies with children and adolescents. Also, an appropriate dosage has yet to be determined.

AIM

This study investigated the safety and the efficacy of levetiracetam for intravenous treatment of convulsive status epilepticus and acute repetitive seizures in children and adolescents.

METHOD

Retrospectively, the study reviewed the medical records of 19 male and 31 female patients under 18 years of age who had received intravenous levetiracetam treatment either for acute repetitive seizures or for convulsive status epilepticus. The patients were admitted between April 1st, 2010 and December 31st, 2011 to the Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. Data were collected on underlying illnesses, etiology of seizures, indication for levetiracetam therapy, initial dosage, rate of infusion, untoward effects during infusion and emerged complications. Efficacy of treatment was defined as the termination of seizure within 30 min of completing levetiracetam infusion and no seizure recurrence within 6 h of initial treatment.

RESULTS

The age range of the 50 patients was from one day to 18 years (mean 79.6 months). The analysis included 52 episodes of 34 acute repetitive seizures (63.4%) and 18 convulsive status epilepticus (34.6%). Infusion rates ranged from 2 to 66 mg/kg/min (mean 29.6). Cessation of seizure was obtained in 59.6% of 52 episodes. Patients with underlying drug resistant epilepsy did not respond to levetiracetam therapy as well as patients with other etiology of seizures. There were no adverse drug reactions or untoward effects observed during the therapy.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous administration of levetiracetam is safe and effective for treatment of acute repetitive seizures and convulsive status epilepticus in children and adolescents. Failure of treatment may be related to underlying drug resistant epilepsy. Further study of appropriate initial dosage and pharmacokinetic variations in the patients is needed as possible explanation of the unresponsiveness.

Effect of levetiracetam in acute encephalitis with refractory, repetitive partial seizures during acute and chronic phase

AIM

To clarify the effect of levetiracetam (LEV) for acute and chronic seizure control in acute encephalitis with refractory, repetitive partial seizures (AERRPS).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical course of six AERRPS cases treated with LEV, and explored the acute phase termination by withdrawal from barbiturate-induced coma under artificial ventilation, and the reduction in seizure frequency during the chronic phase. LEV was administrated orally or via nasogastric tubes as an add-on agent during acute (n=3; age 8-10 years) and chronic (n=3; age 19-30 years) AERRPS.

RESULTS

In the acute phase, administration of LEV (50-60 mg/kg/d) in combination with phenobarbital (n=3; peak 57.9-76.1 μg/ml) and potassium bromide (n=2; 30-36 mg/kg/d)) resulted in successful reduction of intravenous barbiturate dosage and withdrawal from artificial ventilation. In the chronic phase, seizure frequency reduced by >75% for 5-18 months with LEV 750-1500 mg/d.

CONCLUSION

LEV may affect seizure control in AERRPS, particularly during the chronic phase, through its unique action of inhibition of excitatory neurotransmitter release. The regimen of oral barbiturate, potassium bromide and LEV would be worth for trial during the acute phase of AERRPS.

Intravenous levetiracetam in clinical practice--Results from an independent registry

PURPOSE

Most common clinical studies with antiepileptic drugs do not reflect medical everyday practice due to their strict in- and exclusion criteria and specifications of treatment regimens. Here we present a large non-interventional registry with the intention to evaluate the spectrum of applications in daily use and the efficacy and tolerability of intravenously given levetiracetam (LEV-iv).

METHODS

In a prospective approach of 17 neurological and neuropediatric centres in Germany LEV-iv treated patients of all ages were included over a period of 10 months. The observational period was 10 days with daily documentation of LEV-iv administration, type and frequency of seizures, currently used drugs and doses, and adverse events (AEs). In addition, treatment efficacy and tolerability were assessed by patients and physicians at study end as well as practicability of LEV-iv using a five-step scale.

RESULTS

In 95 patients LEV-iv was administered, 93 were included into the analysis. The median LEV-iv dose was 1500 mg (range 110-6000 mg) per day. Median age was 66 years (range 0.7-90.3 years). The majority of patients (n=70, 75%) suffered from status epilepticus (SE, n=55, 59%) and acute seizure clusters (n=15, 16%). Of those with SE, 41 patients (75%) had SE for the first time. Acute seizure clusters and SE terminated in 83% after LEV-iv administration. A total of 29 adverse events were reported in 17 of the 95 patients from the safety set. Ten of these were at least possibly related to LEV-iv treatment. Slight decrease of blood pressure during the infusion (3 patients each) was captured most frequently. No serious side effect was observed. Physicians rated the efficacy and tolerability of LEV-iv treatment as good or very good in 78% and 82% of the cases, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this large observational study of everyday practise the use of LEV-iv exhibited a remarkable good response and tolerability in patients with acute onset seizures (mostly SE). Further randomized controlled studies, like the established status epilepticus trial (ESET) are needed to confirm these findings.

Efficacy of perampanel in refractory nonconvulsive status epilepticus and simple partial status epilepticus

We provide some evidence concerning the efficacy of perampanel (PER) in refractory status epilepticus (SE). We retroactively identified patients with SE treated in our department by searching for the term "status epilepticus" in the electronic archive of medical records. We present and analyze in this paper the subset of data of the patients treated with PER. We analyzed ten episodes of SE in nine patients. At the first administration, PER was given in a dosage of 6mg to most of our patients (7 of 10). On average, PER was administered as the 6th antiepileptic drug (AED) (range: 2-10). Depending on the criterion for efficacy, PER appears effective for the termination of SE in 2 to 6 (of 10) episodes. Unfortunately, safety data for the administration of PER with loading doses needed for the treatment of SE are lacking. Because of this, PER should be used very carefully in refractory SE and only after first-line treatment options have failed.

Status epilepticus and refractory status epilepticus management

Status epilepticus (SE) describes persistent or recurring seizures without a return to baseline mental status and is a common neurologic emergency. SE can occur in the context of epilepsy or may be symptomatic of a wide range of underlying etiologies. The clinician's aim is to rapidly institute care that simultaneously stabilizes the patient medically, identifies and manages any precipitant conditions, and terminates seizures. Seizure management involves "emergent" treatment with benzodiazepines followed by "urgent" therapy with other antiseizure medications. If seizures persist, then refractory SE is diagnosed and management options include additional antiseizure medications or infusions of midazolam or pentobarbital. This article reviews the management of pediatric SE and refractory SE.

Newer antiepileptic drugs: evidence based use

Several new antiepileptic drugs (AED's) have been approved by the FDA in the last 2 decades. The newer AED's score over the older ones, in terms of improved tolerability, safety, improved pharmacokinetics and lower drug-drug interactions. However, efficacy may not be significantly higher. This article reviews the newer antiepileptics approved in the pediatric age group and the evidence for or against their clinical use.

Adjunctive levetiracetam treatment in pediatric Lennox-Gastaut syndrome

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam as an add-on treatment in pediatric patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome.

METHODS

The study was an open-label, multicenter, observational clinical trial of levetiracetam as an add-on treatment in Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. Fifty-five patients aged 1.1-18.6 years (mean, 10.0 years) were enrolled. The study included a 4-8-week titration period and an 8-week maintenance period. The maintenance dose of levetiracetam was 20-80 mg/kg/day, according to its effectiveness and tolerability. The primary end point was reduction in seizure frequency, and related variables were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 55 patents, 51 patients (92.7%) completed the study. Thirty-two patients (58.2%) experienced a more than 50% reduction in seizure frequency, and 15 patients (27.3%) became seizure free. A reduction in seizure frequency of more than 50% was observed in 21 of 36 patients (58.3%) with convulsive seizures, 7 of 12 patients (58.3%) with drop attacks, 2 of 4 patients (50.0%) with myoclonic seizures, and 2 of 3 patients (66.7%) with epileptic spasms. Overall, 34.5% of patients reported adverse events. None of the adverse events were life threatening, and the most common adverse event was hyperactivity (12.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that levetiracetam is a safe and effective treatment in pediatric patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome.

Effectiveness of intravenous levetiracetam as an adjunctive treatment in pediatric refractory status epilepticus

OBJECTIVES

Intravenous levetiracetam (LEV) has been shown to be effective and safe in treating adults with refractory status epilepticus (SE). We sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of intravenous LEV for pediatric patients with refractory SE.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective medical-record review of pediatric patients who were treated with intravenous LEV for refractory SE. Clinical information regarding age, sex, seizure type, and underlying neurological status was collected. We evaluated other anticonvulsants that were used prior to administration of intravenous LEV and assessed loading dose, response to treatment, and any adverse events from intravenous LEV administration.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients (8 boys and 6 girls) received intravenous LEV for the treatment of refractory SE. The mean age of the patients was 4.4 ± 5.5 years (range, 4 days to 14.6 years). Ten of the patients were neurologically healthy prior to the refractory SE, and the other 4 had been previously diagnosed with epilepsy. The mean loading dose of intravenous LEV was 26 ± 4.6 mg/kg (range, 20-30 mg/kg). Seizure termination occurred in 6 (43%) of the 14 patients. In particular, 4 (57%) of the 7 patients younger than 2 years showed seizure termination. No immediate adverse events occurred during or after infusions.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study demonstrated that the adjunctive use of intravenous LEV was effective and well tolerated in pediatric patients with refractory SE, even in patients younger than 2 years. Intravenous LEV should be considered as an effective and safe treatment option for refractory SE in pediatric patients.

Refractory status epilepticus

Refractory status epilepticus is a potentially life-threatening medical emergency. It requires early diagnosis and treatment. There is a lack of consensus upon its semantic definition of whether it is status epilepticus that continues despite treatment with benzodiazepine and one antiepileptic medication (AED), i.e., Lorazepam + phenytoin. Others regard refractory status epilepticus as failure of benzodiazepine and 2 antiepileptic medications, i.e., Lorazepam + phenytoin + phenobarb. Up to 30% patients in SE fail to respond to two antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and 15% continue to have seizure activity despite use of three drugs. Mechanisms that have made the treatment even more challenging are GABA-R that is internalized during status epilepticus and upregulation of multidrug transporter proteins. All patients of refractory status epilepticus require continuous EEG monitoring. There are three main agents used in the treatment of RSE. These include pentobarbital or thiopental, midazolam and propofol. RSE was shown to result in mortality in 35% cases, 39.13% of patients were left with severe neurological deficits, while another 13% had mild neurological deficits.

Clinical pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of levetiracetam

Status epilepticus and acute repetitive seizures still pose a management challenge despite the recent advances in the field of epilepsy. Parenteral formulations of old anticonvulsants are still a cornerstone in acute seizure management and are approved by the FDA. Intravenous levetiracetam (IV LEV), a second generation anticonvulsant, is approved by the FDA as an adjunctive treatment in patients 16 years or older when oral administration is not available. Data have shown that it has a unique mechanism of action, linear pharmacokinetics and no known drug interactions with other anticonvulsants. In this paper, we will review the current literature about the pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of IV LEV and the safety profile of this new anticonvulsant in acute seizure management of both adults and children.

Shake, rattle, and roll: an update on pediatric seizures

Seizure is a common presenting complaint for patients in the pediatric emergency department (PED) setting. In some cases, protocols are in place on how to manage this group of patients, for example, a patient with a simple febrile seizure already back to baseline or a patient with known epilepsy already back to baseline. However, many scenarios present dilemmas for physicians in the PED, specifically patients with status epilepticus (SE). Unfortunately, there is not a national SE protocol, and hospital-specific guidelines may or may not exist. Current practices are constantly changing because new medications arise, and more information is gathered regarding existing medications and guidelines. Here we will review the basics about first-time afebrile seizures presenting to the PED and common treatments specific to seizure types. We will then review SE management basics and medical therapy, including both older and newer agents and their routes of administration for both the prehospital and the hospital setting.

Role of intravenous levetiracetam for acute seizure management in preterm neonates

BACKGROUND

Neonatal seizures are common in the first month of life and may impair neurodevelopmental outcome. Current antiepileptic drugs used in the treatment of neonatal seizures have limited efficacy and undesirable side effects. Intravenous levetiracetam is increasingly being used in the neonatal period to treat seizures. Presently, insufficient data about the efficacy and safety of intravenous levetiracetam in preterm neonates exist.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from preterm neonates who were treated with intravenous levetiracetam at our institution between January 2007 and December 2011. Data were acquired from review of our institution's electronic medical record regarding patients who were treated with intravenous levetiracetam during the neonatal period (0 to 28 days) and were born at preterm gestation (<37 weeks).

RESULTS

Twelve patients received a levetiracetam load of 25 to 50 mg/kg for neonatal seizures. Nine of 11 patients (82%) reached seizure cessation within 24 hours of receiving levetiracetam. No serious side effects were evident. Seven patients (59%) were discharged on oral levetiracetam alone, four patients (33%) were discharged on no oral antiepileptic drug, and one patient (8%) was discharged on levetiracetam and phenobarbital. Eleven of 12 patients were followed up to 6 months after receiving intravenous levetiracetam. Of these, six patients (55%) had achieved seizure freedom and been completely weaned off of all antiepileptic drugs. Three patients (27%) had achieved seizure freedom while still on oral levetiracetam.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous levetiracetam appears to be efficacious for seizure management in preterm neonates.

Levetiracetam use in the critical care setting

Intravenous (IV) levetiracetam (LEV) is currently approved as an alternative or replacement therapy for patients unable to take the oral form of this antiepileptic drug (AED). The oral form has Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indications for adjunctive therapy in the treatment of partial onset epilepsy ages 1 month or more, myoclonic seizures associated with juvenile myoclonic epilepsy starting with the age of 12 and primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures in people 6 years and older. Since the initial introduction, oral and IV LEV has been evaluated in various studies conducted in the critical care setting for the treatment of status epilepticus, stroke-related seizures, seizures following subarachnoid or intracerebral hemorrhage, post-traumatic seizures, tumor-related seizures, and seizures in critically ill patients. Additionally, studies evaluating rapid infusion of IV LEV and therapeutic monitoring of serum LEV levels in different patient populations have been performed. In this review we present the current state of knowledge on LEV use in the critical care setting focusing on the IV uses and discuss future research needs.

Efficacy and tolerability of intravenous levetiracetam in childrens

Intractable epilepsy in children poses a serious medical challenge. Acute repetitive seizures and status epilepticus leads to frequent emergency room visits and hospital admissions. Delay of treatment may lead to resistance to the first-line anticonvulsant therapies. It has been shown that these children continue to remain intractable even after acute seizure management with approved Food and Drug Administration (FDA) agents. Intravenous levetiracetam, a second-generation anticonvulsant was approved by the FDA in 2006 in patients 16 years and older as an alternative when oral treatment is not an option. Data have been published showing that intravenous levetiracetam is safe and efficacious, and can be used in an acute inpatient setting. This current review will discuss the recent data about the safety and tolerability of intravenous levetiracetam in children and neonates, and emphasize the need for a larger prospective multicenter trial to prove the efficacy of this agent in acute seizure management.

Guidelines for the evaluation and management of status epilepticus

Status epilepticus (SE) treatment strategies vary substantially from one institution to another due to the lack of data to support one treatment over another. To provide guidance for the acute treatment of SE in critically ill patients, the Neurocritical Care Society organized a writing committee to evaluate the literature and develop an evidence-based and expert consensus practice guideline. Literature searches were conducted using PubMed and studies meeting the criteria established by the writing committee were evaluated. Recommendations were developed based on the literature using standardized assessment methods from the American Heart Association and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation systems, as well as expert opinion when sufficient data were lacking.

Diagnostic work-up and therapeutic options in management of pediatric status epilepticus

BACKGROUND

Status epilepticus (SE) is a life-threatening neurologic disorder comprising prolonged and unremitting crisis, and two or more series of seizures without complete intercritical recovery.

DATA SOURCES

We reviewed the literature through a Pubmed/Medline research using key words including status epilepticus, antiepileptic drugs and children, in order to revise and compare international/national protocols and to examine pediatric guidelines in SE management.

RESULTS

Neurologic impairment and SE etiology seem to be the most independent risks for mortality. A deep semiologic evaluation is essential to addressing diagnostic work-up. Ematochemical parameters, plasma levels of antiepileptic drugs and clinically oriented toxic/metabolic screening should be mandatory for investigating both causes and effects of SE. Electroencephalography is clearly helpful to characterize focal from generalized SE and to distinguish epileptic events from pseudoseizures, and it is deal to find nonconvulsive SE. Neuroimaging techniques could detect epileptogenic lesions (such as cortical malformations, tumors, demyelinating disorders or strokes) but are common in practice to find negative or controversial results. Pharmacologic management can be essentially arranged in three stages: benzodiazepines for early SE (lasting less than 30 minutes), phenytoin/fosphenytoin, phenobarbital, valproate, levetiracetam or lacosamide for established SE (30-90 minutes), and anesthetics for refractory SE (more than 90 minutes).

CONCLUSIONS

Status epilepticus is the most common neurologic emergency in childhood. A systematic diagnostic work-up and a three steps based therapeutic approach is required at this age.

What is the evidence to use new intravenous AEDs in status epilepticus?

Current standard treatment of established status epilepticus after failure of benzodiazepines is intravenous phenytoin/fosphenytoin, phenobarbital, or valproate. Since 2006 two new antiseizure drugs have become available as intravenous formulation: levetiracetam (2006) and lacosamide (2008). Both drugs have been taken up very rapidly by the clinicians to treat acute seizures and status epilepticus, despite lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials. The favorable pharmacokinetic profile and the good tolerability, especially the lack of sedating effects of both drugs make them promising potential alternatives to the standard antiseizure drugs. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to inform clinicians better about the best choice of treatment in established status epilepticus. The experimental evidence as well as the current clinical experience with levetiracetam and lacosamide are summarized in this review.

Newer anticonvulsant medications in pediatric neurology

OPINION STATEMENT

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are the mainstay of treatment for recurrent seizures. Uncontrolled seizures may cause medical, developmental, and psychological disturbances. The medical practitioner should thus strive to eliminate or minimize seizures. Treatment advances in epilepsy include 1) identification of the basic mechanisms of epilepsy and action of AEDs, 2) the introduction of new AEDs, and 3) the use of neurostimulation, including vagus nerve stimulation. Treatment with AEDs involves balancing each AED's efficacy against its side effects. In some patients, effective AEDs must be discontinued because of intolerable side effects. Although all AEDs have a proven efficacy, the choice of AEDs should be based on better efficacy for individual seizure types or epilepsy syndromes. Side effects also differ from drug to drug and must be taken into account. This article focuses on studies and expert opinion consensus to guide the choice of AEDs.

Treatment of pediatric refractory status epilepticus with topiramate

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated a topiramate (TPM) regimen for treating refractory status epilepticus in the largest pediatric series, reported to date.

METHODS

Fourteen patients received TPM via the nasogastric route. Initially, all patients received TPM as a 5 mg/kg loading dose followed by 5 mg/kg/day in two doses as maintenance. Thereafter, patients were divided into three groups based on the response to TPM therapy and seizure cessation time (full responder, partial responder, and nonresponder). Four patients received only thiopental, two received thiopental, and high-dose midazolam, one received thiopental, high-dose midazolam, and propofol, two received only propofol, one received propofol, and high-dose midazolam and four patients were on a high-dose midazolam infusion.

RESULTS

The median time to seizure cessation was 5.5 h (range 2-48 h). Nine patients were full responders, three were partial responders, and two were nonresponders At follow-up, six patients were weaned successfully from thiopental, two patients from high-dose midazolam and three patients from propofol. Three patients developed mild metabolic acidosis during TPM theraphy.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the patients responded to this treatment which was well tolerated. So we recommended its use for terminating refractory status epilepticus in children.

Use of intravenous levetiracetam for management of acute seizures in neonates

Antiepileptic drugs used for the treatment of neonatal seizures have limited efficacy and undesirable side effects, leading to increased off-label use in neonates. Intravenous levetiracetam became available in August 2006 for use in patients above 16 years of age. Insufficient data are available about the efficacy and safety of intravenous levetiracetam in neonates. Data captured from our institution's electronic medical records were retrospectively analyzed for neonates treated with intravenous levetiracetam between January 2007 and December 2009. Data were acquired by reviewing our electronic medical records. Twenty-two patients received a levetiracetam load of 10-50 mg/kg for neonatal seizures. Nineteen of 22 patients (86%) demonstrated immediate seizure cessation at 1 hour. Seven of 22 patients (32%) achieved complete seizure cessation after administration of the loading dose, 14 (64%) achieved seizure cessation by 24 hours, 19 (86%) by 48 hours, and all 22 (100%) by 72 hours. No serious side effects were evident. Nineteen patients (86%) were discharged on oral levetiracetam, and only two patients (9%) were discharged with an additional oral antiepileptic drug. Intravenous levetiracetam can be used as monotherapy and adjunctively in acute seizure management during the neonatal period.

Levetiracetam for treatment of neonatal seizures

Neonatal seizures are often refractory to treatment with initial antiseizure medications. Consequently, clinicians turn to alternatives such as levetiracetam, despite the lack of published data regarding its safety, tolerability, or efficacy in the neonatal population. We report a retrospectively identified cohort of 23 neonates with electroencephalographically confirmed seizures who received levetiracetam. Levetiracetam was considered effective if administration was associated with a greater than 50% seizure reduction within 24 hours. Levetiracetam was initiated at a mean conceptional age of 41 weeks. The mean initial dose was 16 ± 6 mg/kg and the mean maximum dose was 45 ± 19 mg/kg/day. No respiratory or cardiovascular adverse effects were reported or detected. Levetiracetam was associated with a greater than 50% seizure reduction in 35% (8 of 23), including seizure termination in 7. Further study is warranted to determine optimal levetiracetam dosing in neonates and to compare efficacy with other antiseizure medications.

Medical management of refractory status epilepticus

This review discusses the medical management of pediatric refractory status epilepticus, defined here as persistent seizures of any type after the administration of 2 appropriate anticonvulsants. The use of both nonanesthetic and anesthetic anticonvulsants is discussed along with the relative strengths and weaknesses of each agent. Appropriate treatment goals and the use of electroencephalographic monitoring are described as are reasonable treatment algorithms. Finally, ethical considerations are briefly discussed in the context of available outcome data.

Medical treatment of pediatric status epilepticus

Status epilepticus (SE) is a common pediatric neurologic emergency that refers to a prolonged seizure or recurrent seizures without a return to baseline mental status between seizures. Appropriate treatment strategies are necessary to prevent prolonged SE and its associated morbidity and mortality. This review discusses the importance of a rapid and organized management approach, reviews data related to commonly utilized medications including benzodiazepines, phenytoin, phenobarbital, valproate sodium, and levetiracetam, and then provides a sample SE management algorithm.

Intravenous levetiracetam in the management of acute seizures in children

Levetiracetam may be effective in children with acute seizures or status epilepticus. We performed a retrospective chart review of children who received intravenous levetiracetam within 30 minutes of a seizure. Seventy-three patients during a 2-year study period met our inclusion criteria. The mean (+/- S.D.) age and weight of the patients were 5.59 +/- 5.6 years (range, 1 day to 17.8 years) and 23.1 +/- 21 kg (range, 1.97-97 kg), respectively. Patients received a mean (+/- S.D.) levetiracetam dose of 29.4 +/- 13.5 mg/kg. Most children (n = 49, or 67%) received additional antiepileptic drugs to abort their seizure. Overall, the mean (+/- S.D.) total (abortive plus chronic) number of concomitant antiepileptic drugs used by the population was 2.53 +/- 1.7 (1.07 +/- 0.98 as additional abortive therapy, and 1.42 +/- 1.29 as chronic therapy). Most patients received levetiracetam for serial seizures (79%), whereas 12% and 8% manifested a single seizure or status epilepticus, respectively. Clinical effectiveness at 1, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours after the initial levetiracetam dose constituted the primary study outcome. Eighty-nine percent of patients remained seizure-free at 1 hour. This rate decreased at each evaluation time point. Most patients (71%) were placed on maintenance levetiracetam within 24 hours of their loading dose. The predictive ability of patient and drug regimen variables in outcomes was poor. Only the number of concomitant antiepileptic drugs consistently predicted outcomes. Levetiracetam was well tolerated at the doses studied, and appears most effective in single seizure events.

Levetiracetam in nonconvulsive status epilepticus in a child with Angelman syndrome

Children with Angelman syndrome have an increased risk of developing a nonconvulsive status epilepticus. Although the urgency to treat nonconvulsive status epilepticus depends on the underlying illness, most clinicians and authors agree that treatment should be focused to rapidly terminate this condition. Until now, the use of levetiracetam to treat nonconvulsive status epilepticus in children is based only on some case reports. Our case further supports this treatment regime for a subgroup of children with a special risk of nonconvulsive status epilepticus and developmental delay.

Levetiracetam has a time- and stimulation-dependent effect on synaptic transmission

We recently reported that rodent hippocampal slices incubated with levetiracetam for 3h had altered responses to repetitive stimulation and reduced neurotransmitter release. However, our experiments failed to determine the actual time course of diminished transmission in individual slices followed over time. We have now been able to record from the same slices for up to 3h to determine the latency of the levetiracetam effect after the onset of exposure. Within 30 min of levetiracetam exposure, the later field potentials of a burst were reduced. Between 60 and 180 min the relative size of later field potentials remained stable. Similar time-dependent reductions were not seen in control slices or in slices exposed to the inactive levetiracetam isomer UCB L060. These new results establish a clear time dependence of the levetiracetam effect, even in vitro, and are best explained by levetiracetam acting within neurons to alter synaptic vesicle release.