Topiramate is effective for status epilepticus and seizure control in neuraminidase deficiency

Therapeutic Options for Patients with Refractory Status Epilepticus in Palliative Settings or with a Limitation of Life-Sustaining Therapies: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) represents a serious medical condition requiring early and targeted therapy. Given the increasing number of elderly or multimorbid patients with a limitation of life-sustaining therapy (LOT) or within a palliative care setting (PCS), guidelines-oriented therapy escalation options for RSE have to be omitted frequently.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review sought to summarize the evidence for fourth-line antiseizure drugs (ASDs) and other minimally or non-invasive therapeutic options beyond guideline recommendations in patients with RSE to elaborate on possible treatment options for patients undergoing LOT or in a PCS.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, focusing on fourth-line ASDs or other minimally or non-invasive therapeutic options was performed in February and June 2020 using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. The search terminology was constructed using the name of the specific ASD or therapy option and the term 'status epilepticus' with the use of Boolean operators, e.g. "(brivaracetam) AND (status epilepticus)". The respective Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Emtree terms were used, if available.

RESULTS

There is currently no level 1, grade A evidence for the use of ASDs in RSE. The best evidence was found for the use of lacosamide and topiramate (level 3, grade C), followed by brivaracetam, perampanel (each level 4, grade D) and stiripentol, oxcarbazepine and zonisamide (each level 5, grade D). Regarding non-medicinal options, there is little evidence for the use of the ketogenic diet (level 4, grade D) and magnesium sulfate (level 5, grade D) in RSE. The broad use of immunomodulatory or immunosuppressive treatment options in the absence of a presumed autoimmune etiology cannot be recommended; however, if an autoimmune etiology is assumed, steroid pulse, intravenous immunoglobulins and plasma exchange/plasmapheresis should be considered (level 4, grade D). Even if several studies suggested that the use of neurosteroids (level 5, grade D) is beneficial in RSE, the current data situation indicates that there is formal evidence against it.

CONCLUSIONS

RSE in patients undergoing LOT or in a PCS represents a challenge for modern clinicians and epileptologists. The evidence for the use of ASDs in RSE beyond that in current guidelines is low, but several effective and well-tolerated options are available that should be considered in this patient population. More so than in any other population, advance care planning, advance directives, and medical ethical aspects have to be considered carefully before and during therapy.

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.

Treatment of Generalized Convulsive Status Epilepticus in Pediatric Patients

Generalized convulsive status epilepticus (GCSE) is one of the most common neurologic emergencies and can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality if not treated promptly and aggressively. Management of GCSE is staged and generally involves the use of life support measures, identification and management of underlying causes, and rapid initiation of anticonvulsants. The purpose of this article is to review and evaluate published reports regarding the treatment of impending, established, refractory, and super-refractory GCSE in pediatric patients.

Enteral topiramate in a pediatric patient with refractory status epilepticus: a case report and review of the literature

We describe the use of topiramate in a healthy 12-year-old (88-kg) male who developed refractory generalized convulsive status epilepticus. Seizures persisted despite aggressive use of benzodiazepines (intravenous lorazepam; oral clorazepate), barbiturates (i.e., phenobarbital, pentobarbital), and hydantoins. The child's seizures were controlled with nasogastrically administered topiramate in doses up to 500 mg twice daily (11.4 mg/kg/day). The patient did not display any clinical or laboratory signs of metabolic acidosis while receiving topiramate. Topiramate should be considered as a treatment option in refractory status epilepticus.

Topiramate as an adjunctive treatment in patients with refractory status epilepticus: an observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) is the most severe manifestation of status epilepticus (SE), often requiring intensive care and therapeutic coma. It is associated with prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stays, as well as increased morbidity and mortality. Treatment involves both intravenous anaesthetics and antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) that can be administrated intravenously, by nasogastric tube or by percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Experience with some of the newer AEDs for the treatment of RSE is restricted and higher-class evidence regarding tolerability and efficacy is lacking. Topiramate is a potent broad-spectrum AED with several modes of action, including blockade of the ionotropic glutamatergic AMPA receptor, which is likely to be an important mechanism for the treatment of SE. While there is no commercially available intravenous formulation, topiramate can be administered enterally, which may make it suitable for the treatment of RSE.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the tolerability, safety profile and efficacy of adjunctive and enterally administered topiramate in patients with RSE.

METHODS

A medical chart review was performed of all consecutive patients treated for RSE between August 2004 and December 2011 at the ICU of the University Hospital Basel (Basel, Switzerland).

RESULTS

113 (43%) of all consecutive 268 patients with SE developed RSE. Of those, 35 (31%) were treated with topiramate. Median age was 60.5 years. Topiramate was used as an add-on treatment after 1-6 (median 4) prior administered AEDs had failed. It was introduced after a median of 2 (range 2-23) days for a duration of 1-24 (median 3) days. The response rate after topiramate administration as the third AED was 86% (6/7 patients), and remained stable at 67% after administration as the fourth, fifth, sixth or seventh AED when the groups of successfully and probably successfully treated patients were pooled. Overall, RSE was terminated in 71% of patients within 72 hours after first administration of topiramate, in 9% of patients, within 24 hours (none in the 800 mg/day group; 9% in the 400-799 mg/day group; and 11% in the <400 mg/day group). Mortality was 31% and was not strictly dependent on failure to terminate RSE, but also on the underlying aetiology of RSE. There were no serious or fatal adverse events directly attributable to topiramate. Adverse effects included slight hyperchloremic acidosis and hyperammonemia (all associated with co-medication with valproic acid).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with enterally administered topiramate was feasible, well tolerated and had a good safety profile in patients with RSE in this observational, single-centre, cohort study. Refractory SE was terminated in the majority of patients within 3 days after initiation of topiramate. Prospective studies are warranted to further evaluate topiramate for the treatment of RSE.