The anaesthetic and intensive care of status epilepticus

Diagnosis and Management of Adult Status Epilepticus in Resource-Limited Settings: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Status epilepticus (SE) is the leading cause of death in patients with epilepsy, and it affects people in low/middle-income countries (LMICs) at a much higher rate. There is likely a significant gap between the recommended diagnosis and treatment of SE and current practices in resource-limited settings. We conducted a systematic literature review to determine how convulsive and nonconvulsive SE in adults is diagnosed and managed in LMICs.

METHODS

All relevant articles from Embase, Medline, PubMed, and the Virtual Health Library Regional Portal databases, published before September 16, 2024, were included. Studies needed to take place in LMICs and include treatment and outcomes of patients with SE. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials and Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tools.

RESULTS

Our review included 23 studies from 3 continents including 1,526 patients, with most of the studies conducted in Asia. There is a lack of literature from Africa and surrounding the topic of nonconvulsive SE. The commonest etiology of SE was an acute symptomatic cause (21%-88%), with encephalitis predominating overall. Diagnostic and management practices varied greatly, dictated by local availability of drugs and expertise, rather than guidelines. First-line benzodiazepines were routinely underdosed while older and cheaper second-line antiseizure medications, such as valproic acid, phenytoin, and phenobarbital, were more frequently administered. In addition, there was a general lack of access to continuous EEG monitoring, with only 5 studies from tertiary-level centers in Asia reporting its usage. Mortality outcomes of up to 42.6% are higher in comparison with high-income countries.

DISCUSSION

The heterogeneity in management practices of SE in LMICs highlights the lack of consistent treatment, with very few studies from Africa and Latin America available in the literature. This contributed to the limitations of this review, with only a small region of countries (mostly from Asia) represented and retrospective review of clinical records predominantly used. The nonuniformity of diagnostic and management practices in SE has highlighted the need for clinically appropriate guidelines in LMICs.

Evaluation of a human urine barbiturate test to screen for pentobarbital euthanasia of dogs and cats

Pentobarbital is used commonly to euthanize animals. Occasionally during a death investigation, it is necessary to determine whether a cat or dog was euthanized via pentobarbital overdose. Screening for the detection of barbiturates including pentobarbital can be performed using commercial immunochromatographic tests. We used a commercial immunochromatographic test for barbiturates in humans to screen for barbiturates in urine collected postmortem from 20 dogs and 20 cats to determine whether they had been euthanized with pentobarbital. Additionally, we analyzed the urine for pentobarbital using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry as a confirmatory test. Screening and confirmation testing revealed 100% agreement between the tests and with the euthanasia status of each animal. Our results support the use of the immunochromatographic test for the screening of urine collected postmortem to assess for the presence of barbiturates, specifically pentobarbital, used for euthanasia.

Predictors of outcome in refractory generalized convulsive status epilepticus

Objective

Refractory status epilepticus is a serious condition in which seizure continues despite use of two antiepileptic medications. Retrospective studies have shown that 29%‐43% of SE patients progress into RSE despite treatment. Mortality following RSE is high. We aimed to evaluate the predictors of outcome in patients with RSE at a tertiary care center.

Methods

Sixty‐eight consecutive patients with RSE who presented to our hospital between February 2018 and January 2020 were evaluated for outcome.

Result

In our study 28(41.2%), patients who failed to respond to first‐ and second‐line antiepileptic drug responded to the third‐line antiepileptic drug thus avoiding mechanical ventilation and intravenous anesthesia. Low GCS at admission (P < .001), need for mechanical ventilation and intravenous anesthesia (P = .018), and long duration of RSE before recovery (P = .035) were strongly associated with worse outcome. Duration of RSE before starting treatment (P = .147), previous history of seizure (P = .717), and age of the patient (P = .319) did not influence the outcome.

Significance

In our study, we prospectively evaluated patients with RSE and followed them for one month after discharge from the hospital. Unlike some of the previous studies, we identified an interesting finding whereby a significant proportion of the patients responded to the third‐line antiepileptic drug and thus avoiding the complications related to mechanical ventilation.

Treatment of Refractory and Super-refractory Status Epilepticus

Refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus (SE) are serious illnesses with a high risk of morbidity and even fatality. In the setting of refractory generalized convulsive SE (GCSE), there is ample justification to use continuous infusions of highly sedating medications-usually midazolam, pentobarbital, or propofol. Each of these medications has advantages and disadvantages, and the particulars of their use remain controversial. Continuous EEG monitoring is crucial in guiding the management of these critically ill patients: in diagnosis, in detecting relapse, and in adjusting medications. Forms of SE other than GCSE (and its continuation in a "subtle" or nonconvulsive form) should usually be treated far less aggressively, often with nonsedating anti-seizure drugs (ASDs). Management of "non-classic" NCSE in ICUs is very complicated and controversial, and some cases may require aggressive treatment. One of the largest problems in refractory SE (RSE) treatment is withdrawing coma-inducing drugs, as the prolonged ICU courses they prompt often lead to additional complications. In drug withdrawal after control of convulsive SE, nonsedating ASDs can assist; medical management is crucial; and some brief seizures may have to be tolerated. For the most refractory of cases, immunotherapy, ketamine, ketogenic diet, and focal surgery are among several newer or less standard treatments that can be considered. The morbidity and mortality of RSE is substantial, but many patients survive and even return to normal function, so RSE should be treated promptly and as aggressively as the individual patient and type of SE indicate.

Immunity and inflammation in status epilepticus and its sequelae: possibilities for therapeutic application

Status epilepticus (SE) is a life-threatening neurological emergency often refractory to available treatment options. It is a very heterogeneous condition in terms of clinical presentation and causes, which besides genetic, vascular and other structural causes also include CNS or severe systemic infections, sudden withdrawal from benzodiazepines or anticonvulsants and rare autoimmune etiologies. Treatment of SE is essentially based on expert opinions and antiepileptic drug treatment per se seems to have no major impact on prognosis. There is, therefore, urgent need of novel therapies that rely upon a better understanding of the basic mechanisms underlying this clinical condition. Accumulating evidence in animal models highlights that inflammation ensuing in the brain during SE may play a determinant role in ongoing seizures and their long-term detrimental consequences, independent of an infection or auto-immune cause; this evidence encourages reconsideration of the treatment flow in SE patients.

Pharmacotherapy for Refractory and Super-Refractory Status Epilepticus in Adults

Patients with prolonged seizures that do not respond to intravenous benzodiazepines and a second-line anticonvulsant suffer from refractory status epilepticus and those with seizures that do not respond to continuous intravenous anesthetic anticonvulsants suffer from super-refractory status epilepticus. Both conditions are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. A strict pharmacological treatment regimen is urgently required, but the level of evidence for the available drugs is very low. Refractory complex focal status epilepticus generally does not require anesthetics, but all intravenous non-anesthetizing anticonvulsants may be used. Most descriptive data are available for levetiracetam, phenytoin and valproate. Refractory generalized convulsive status epilepticus is a life-threatening emergency, and long-term clinical consequences are eminent. Administration of intravenous anesthetics is mandatory, and drugs acting at the inhibitory gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)A receptor such as midazolam, propofol and thiopental/pentobarbital are recommended without preference for one of those. One in five patients with anesthetic treatment does not respond and has super-refractory status epilepticus. With sustained seizure activity, excitatory N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors are increasingly expressed post-synaptically. Ketamine is an antagonist at this receptor and may prove efficient in some patients at later stages. Neurosteroids such as allopregnanolone increase sensitivity at GABAA receptors; a Phase 1/2 trial demonstrated safety and tolerability, but randomized controlled data failed to demonstrate efficacy. Adjunct ketogenic diet may contribute to termination of difficult-to-treat status epilepticus. Randomized controlled trials are needed to increase evidence for treatment of refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus, but there are multiple obstacles for realization. Hitherto, prospective multicenter registries for pharmacological treatment may help to improve our knowledge.

Propofol versus thiopental sodium for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus

BACKGROUND

This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 6, 2015).Failure to respond to antiepileptic drugs in patients with uncontrolled seizure activity such as refractory status epilepticus (RSE) has led to the use of anaesthetic drugs. Coma is induced with anaesthetic drugs to achieve complete control of seizure activity. Thiopental sodium and propofol are popularly used for this purpose. Both agents have been found to be effective. However, there is a substantial lack of evidence as to which of the two drugs is better in terms of clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy, adverse effects, and short- and long-term outcomes of refractory status epilepticus (RSE) treated with one of the two anaesthetic agents, thiopental sodium or propofol.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (16 August 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (CRSO, 16 August 2016), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 16 August 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov (16 August 2016), and the South Asian Database of Controlled Clinical Trials (16 August 2016). Previously we searched IndMED, but this was not accessible at the time of the latest update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs (regardless of blinding) assessing the control of RSE using either thiopental sodium or propofol in patients of any age and gender.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the search results and reviewed the abstracts of relevant and eligible trials before retrieving the full-text publications.

MAIN RESULTS

One study with a total of 24 participants was available for review. This study was a small, single-blind, multicentre trial studying adults with RSE receiving either propofol or thiopental sodium for the control of seizure activity. This study was terminated early due to recruitment problems. For our primary outcome of total control of seizures after the first course of study drug, there were 6/14 patients versus 2/7 patients in the propofol and thiopental sodium groups, respectively (risk ratio (RR) 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 5.61, low quality evidence). Mortality was seen in 3/14 patients versus 1/7 patients in the propofol and thiopental sodium groups, respectively (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.19 to 11.93, low quality evidence). Our third primary outcome of length of ICU stay was not reported. For our secondary outcomes of adverse events, infection was seen in 7/14 patients versus 5/7 patients in the propofol and thiopental sodium groups, respectively (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.41). Hypotension during administration of study drugs and requiring use of vasopressors was seen in 7/14 patients versus 4/7 patients in the propofol and thiopental sodium groups, respectively (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.38 to 2.00). The other severe complication noted was non-fatal propofol infusion syndrome in one patient. Patients receiving thiopental sodium required more days of mechanical ventilation when compared with patients receiving propofol: (median (range) 17 days (5 to 70 days) with thiopental sodium versus four days (2 to 28 days) with propofol). At three months there was no evidence of a difference between the drugs with respect to outcome measures such as control of seizure activity and functional outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review we have found no new studies.There is a lack of robust, randomised, controlled evidence to clarify the efficacy of propofol and thiopental sodium compared to each other in the treatment of RSE. There is a need for large RCTs for this serious condition.

Pharmacotherapy for Status Epilepticus

Status epilepticus (SE) represents the most severe form of epilepsy. It is one of the most common neurologic emergencies, with an incidence of up to 61 per 100,000 per year and an estimated mortality of 20 %. Clinically, tonic-clonic convulsive SE is divided into four subsequent stages: early, established, refractory, and super-refractory. Pharmacotherapy of status epilepticus, especially of its later stages, represents an "evidence-free zone," due to a lack of high-quality, controlled trials to inform clinical decisions. This comprehensive narrative review focuses on the pharmacotherapy of SE, presented according to the four-staged approach outlined above, and providing pharmacological properties and efficacy/safety data for each antiepileptic drug according to the strength of scientific evidence from the available literature. Data sources included MEDLINE and back-tracking of references in pertinent studies. Intravenous lorazepam or intramuscular midazolam effectively control early SE in approximately 63-73 % of patients. Despite a suboptimal safety profile, intravenous phenytoin or phenobarbital are widely used treatments for established SE; alternatives include valproate, levetiracetam, and lacosamide. Anesthetics are widely used in refractory and super-refractory SE, despite the current lack of trials in this field. Data on alternative treatments in the later stages are limited. Valproate and levetiracetam represent safe and effective alternatives to phenobarbital and phenytoin for treatment of established SE persisting despite first-line treatment with benzodiazepines. To date there are no class I data to support recommendations for most antiepileptic drugs for established, refractory, and super-refractory SE. Limiting the methodologic heterogeneity across studies is required and high-class randomized, controlled trials to inform clinicians about the best treatment in established and refractory status are needed.

Propofol versus thiopental sodium for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 8, 2012.Failure to respond to antiepileptic drugs in patients with uncontrolled seizure activity such as refractory status epilepticus (RSE) has led to the use of anaesthetic drugs. Coma is induced with anaesthetic drugs to achieve complete control of seizure activity. Thiopental sodium and propofol are popularly used for this purpose. Both agents have been found to be effective. However, there is a substantial lack of evidence as to which of the two drugs is better in terms of clinical outcome.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy, adverse effects, and short- and long-term outcomes of RSE treated with one of the two anaesthetic agents, thiopental sodium or propofol.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (26 March 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library Issue 2, February 2015) and MEDLINE (1946 to 26 March 2015). We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov (26 March 2015), the South Asian Database of Controlled Clinical Trials and IndMED (a bibliographic database of Indian Medical Journals).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled studies (regardless of blinding) of control of RSE using either thiopental sodium or propofol in patients of any age and gender.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the search results and reviewed the abstracts of relevant and eligible trials before retrieving the full-text publications.

MAIN RESULTS

One study with a total of 24 participants was available for review. This study was a small, single-blind, multicentre trial studying adults with RSE receiving either propofol or thiopental sodium for the control of seizure activity. This study cannot be considered of high methodological quality. This study was terminated early due to recruitment problems. This study showed a wide confidence interval suggesting that the drugs may differ in efficacy up to more than two-fold. Days of mechanical ventilation were more in patients receiving thiopental sodium when compared with propofol. At three months there was no evidence of a difference between the drugs with respect to outcome measures such as control of seizure activity and functional outcome. Adverse events reported in this study were infection, hypotension and intestinal ischaemia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review we have found no new studies.There is a lack of robust, randomised, controlled evidence that can clarify the efficacy of propofol and thiopental sodium compared to each other in the treatment of RSE. There is a need for large randomised controlled trials for this serious condition.

Determinants and predictors of outcome in super refractory status epilepticus--a developing country perspective

IMPORTANCE

Super refractory status epilepticus (SRSE) is a recent entity. There is limited information about the etiology and outcome of SRSE from developing countries.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated determinants and predictors of outcome in patients with convulsive SRSE in Indian population.

METHODS

In this open cohort study, data of patients with convulsive SE admitted in neurointensive care unit (NICU) from 2005 to 2013 was retrospectively analyzed. Regression and survival analysis was done for outcome of patients divided into non refractory SE (NRSE), refractory SE (RSE), and SRSE groups.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome for analysis was in hospital mortality. Also functional outcome at 6 months was graded according to the Glasgow outcome scale (GOS), and classified as good (GOS 4 and 5) and poor (GOS 1, 2 and 3) outcome groups.

RESULTS

Out of 177 patients with SE, 105 (59.3%) had NRSE; 72 (40.7%) had RSE of which 30 (16.9% of 177) were sub-classified as SRSE. SRSE was frequent (39%) in children (p<0.01), elderly (21.7%; p<0.003), and in incident SE (82.1%, p=0.05). Encephalitis was the commonest etiology in RSE (30.9%, p=0.015), SRSE (66.7%, p<0.001) than NRSE (12.3%). Encephalitis (β=8.250 (1.8-37.82); p=0.007) was the determinant of the progression of SE to SRSE. Overall mortality was 19.2%, highest in SRSE (40.0%) followed by RSE (35.7%), both significantly (p<0.001) higher than NRSE (6.7%). Mortality was high in patients with encephalitis than other etiologies (39.1% vs. 12.1%; p=0.001). Acidosis predicted mortality in the entire cohort (β=7.313 (1.6-32.58); p=0.009); however none of the variables predicted mortality in SRSE patients. At 6 months follow up only 33.3% of patients with SRSE were in GOS good outcome group when compared to RSE (33.3% vs. 57.1%; p=0.055), and NRSE (33.3% vs. 79.1%; p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

SRSE is common in children, elderly, and incident SE. Encephalitis was the determinant of progression of SE to SRSE. None of the variables predicted mortality in SRSE patients. Sixty percent of patients with SRSE survived and one third had good outcome. Therefore one should continue the care inspite of weeks of SE.

Prognosis and predictors of outcome of refractory generalized convulsive status epilepticus in adults treated in neurointensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the etiological profile, clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with refractory generalized convulsive status epilepticus treated in Neurological Intensive Care Unit (NICU).

METHODS

In this open cohort study, data of 126 patients, aged 18 years and above, with convulsive status epilepticus (SE) admitted in NICU was collected. Status epilepticus was defined as seizures lasting for more than five minutes without regaining consciousness. Refractory SE (RSE) was defined as SE refractory to 2 antiepileptic drugs and requiring anesthetic agents for seizure control. Survival and regression analysis were done to analyze the outcome and factors predicting outcome respectively in the study population.

RESULTS

Out of 126 patients, 81 patients had non -refractory status epilepticus (NRSE); 45 (35.7%) had RSE. Acute symptomatic etiology was noted in 58.6% of entire cohort. Significantly higher percentage of patients with RSE had an etiology of CNS infections than NRSE group (44.4% vs. 23.5%; P=0.0171). Amongst the CNS infections, viral encephalitis was significantly higher in RSE than NRSE patients (31% vs. 6.2%; P=0.0004). All the patients with RSE required mechanical ventilation. Overall mortality was 19%. The mortality in RSE was 42% (19 out of 45), significantly higher when compared to NRSE where only 6% (5 out of 81) died. On logistic regression, the only predictor of death was fever with an odds ratio of 8.55 (P=0.024).

CONCLUSION

CNS infections, especially viral encephalitis and complications of mechanical ventilation were significantly higher in adult RSE patients. Although mortality is higher in adult patients with RSE, etiology does not contribute to mortality; however fever predicts mortality in these patients. Aggressive management of underlying etiology and prevention of systemic complications may improve outcome in adult RSE patients.

Comparison between the effect of propofol and midazolam on picrotoxin-induced convulsions in rat

Propofol is a short acting intravenous anesthetic that has been used in the treatment of status epileptics. However, the occurrence of seizures in epileptic and non-epileptic patients during recovery from propofol induced anesthesia suggests that propofol may have proconvulsant effects. We have previously shown that propofol displays anticonvulsant effects against picrotoxin (PTX) induced seizures during its peak sedative effects. The purpose of the present study was to compare the time course of the effect of intravenous administration of various doses (2.5, 5, and 10 mg/kg) of propofol and midazolam on PTX-induced seizures in adult female Sprague-Dawley rats. The latency to onset of clonic seizures induced by intraperitoneal injection of PTX was significantly increased by the highest dose of propofol and all doses of midazolam, suggesting that both agents display anticonvulsant effects. The anticonvulsant effects of propofol (10 mg/kg) lasted about 20 min and PTX-induced clonic seizures were observed thereafter and peaked within 30 min post drug administration. Clonic seizures progressed rapidly to tonic seizures leading to high rate of PTX-induced mortality. In midazolam (10 mg/kg) treated rats, clonic seizures were observed 25 min after drug administration and the number of rats exhibiting clonic seizures was highest within 40 min. However, clonic seizures did not progress into tonic seizures and thus, PTX-induced seizure related mortality was significantly reduced. In conclusion, this study provides further evidence for the anticonvulsant effects of propofol and midazolam against PTX-induced seizures. Furthermore, the data of the current study showed that midazolam was more effective than propofol against PTX-induced tonic seizures.

Propofol versus thiopental sodium for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus (Review)

BACKGROUND

Failure to respond to antiepileptic drugs in uncontrolled seizure activity such as refractory status epilepticus (RSE) has led to the use of anaesthetic drugs. Coma is induced with anaesthetic drugs to achieve complete control of seizure activity. Thiopental sodium and propofol are popularly used for this purpose. Both agents have been found to be effective. However, there is substantial lack of evidence as to which of the two drugs is better in terms of clinical outcome.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy, adverse effects, and short- and long-term outcomes of RSE treated with one of the two anaesthetic agents, thiopental sodium or propofol.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (10 May 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL Issue 4 of 12, The Cochrane Library 2012), and MEDLINE (1946 to May week 1, 2012). We also searched (10 May 2012) ClinicalTrials.gov, The South Asian Database of Controlled Clinical Trials, and IndMED (a bibliographic database of Indian Medical Journals).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled studies (regardless of blinding) of control of RSE using either thiopental sodium or propofol.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the search results and reviewed abstracts of relevant and eligible trials before retrieving the full text publications.

MAIN RESULTS

One study was available for review. This study was a small, single-blind, multicentre trial studying adults with RSE and receiving either propofol or thiopental sodium for the control of seizure activity (Rossetti 2011). This study showed a wide confidence interval suggesting that the drugs may differ in efficacy up to more than two-fold. There was no evidence of a difference between the drugs with respect to the outcome measures such as control of seizure activity and functional outcome at three months.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is lack of robust and randomised controlled evidence that can clarify the efficacy of propofol and thiopental sodium over each other in the treatment of RSE. There is a need for large, randomised controlled trials for this serious condition.

Epilepsy and nonepilepsy surgery: Recent advancements in anesthesia management

Epilepsy is one of the most common encountered neurological disorders. Surgical procedures in epileptic patient throw numerous challenges to the attending anesthesiologist during the perioperative period. Various anesthetic drug interactions with antiepileptics, intraoperative and postoperative seizures management and management of status epilepticus are few considerations which an anesthesiologist can confront both during emergency or elective surgery. The role of anesthesiologist acquires significant dimensions in management of epilepsy ranging from operative procedure, status epilepticus to the intensive care management of such patients. It requires a skilful and clinically precise handling of such patients during pre-op, peri-op and post-op period. Majority of times these patients present with co-morbidities which makes the prophylactic management of epilepsy extremely difficult during surgical procedures. The responsibilities of anesthesiologist involve management of epileptic patients not only during epilepsy and nonepilepsy surgery but for other diagnostic and therapeutic procedures as well where sedation or anesthesia services are required. Postoperative management of such patients include careful observation for any seizures and/or pseudo-seizures so as to manage appropriately. The knowledge regarding various antiepileptic agents and their potential side effects and interactions with anesthetic agents are of prime concern during surgical procedures for epilepsy and nonepileptic surgeries. The present article discusses the various anesthetic implications and considerations during management of such patients for epilepsy and nonepilepsy surgery.

Propofol versus thiopental sodium for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus

BACKGROUND

Failure to respond to antiepileptic drugs in uncontrolled seizure activity such as refractory status epilepticus (RSE) has led to the use of anaesthetic drugs. Coma is induced with anaesthetic drugs to achieve complete control of seizure activity. Thiopental sodium and propofol are popularly used for this purpose. Both agents have been found to be effective. However, there is substantial lack of evidence as to which of the two drugs is better in terms of clinical outcome.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy, adverse effects, and short- and long-term outcomes of RSE treated with one of the two anaesthetic agents, thiopental sodium or propofol.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (10 May 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL Issue 4 of 12, The Cochrane Library 2012), and MEDLINE (1946 to May week 1, 2012). We also searched (10 May 2012) ClinicalTrials.gov, The South Asian Database of Controlled Clinical Trials, and IndMED (a bibliographic database of Indian Medical Journals).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled studies (regardless of blinding) of control of RSE using either thiopental sodium or propofol.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the search results and reviewed abstracts of relevant and eligible trials before retrieving the full text publications.

MAIN RESULTS

One study was available for review. This study was a small, single-blind, multicentre trial studying adults with RSE and receiving either propofol or thiopental sodium for the control of seizure activity (Rossetti 2011). This study showed a wide confidence interval suggesting that the drugs may differ in efficacy up to more than two-fold. There was no evidence of a difference between the drugs with respect to the outcome measures such as control of seizure activity and functional outcome at three months.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is lack of robust and randomised controlled evidence that can clarify the efficacy of propofol and thiopental sodium over each other in the treatment of RSE. There is a need for large, randomised controlled trials for this serious condition.

Anaesthesia and epilepsy

Epilepsy is the most common serious neurological disorder, with a prevalence of 0.5-1% of the population. While the traditional antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) still play a significant role in treatment of seizures, there has been an influx of newer agents over the last 20 yr, which are now in common usage. Anaesthetists are frequently faced with patients with epilepsy undergoing emergency or elective surgery and patients suffering seizures and status epilepticus in the intensive care unit (ICU). This review examines perioperative epilepsy management, the mode of action of AEDs and their interaction with anaesthetic agents, potential adverse effects of anaesthetic agents, and the acute management of seizures and refractory status epilepticus on the ICU. Relevant literature was identified by a Pubmed search of epilepsy and status epilepticus in conjunction with individual anaesthetic agents.

Management of refractory status epilepticus in adults: still more questions than answers

Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) is defined as status epilepticus that continues despite treatment with benzodiazepines and one antiepileptic drug. RSE should be treated promptly to prevent morbidity and mortality; however, scarce evidence is available to support the choice of specific treatments. Major independent outcome predictors are age (not modifiable) and cause (which should be actively targeted). Recent recommendations for adults suggest that the aggressiveness of treatment for RSE should be tailored to the clinical situation. To minimise intensive care unit-related complications, focal RSE without impairment of consciousness might initially be approached conservatively; conversely, early induction of pharmacological coma is advisable in generalised convulsive forms of the disorder. At this stage, midazolam, propofol, or barbiturates are the most commonly used drugs. Several other treatments, such as additional anaesthetics, other antiepileptic or immunomodulatory compounds, or non-pharmacological approaches (eg, electroconvulsive treatment or hypothermia), have been used in protracted RSE. Treatment lasting weeks or months can sometimes result in a good outcome, as in selected patients after encephalitis or autoimmune disorders. Well designed prospective studies of RSE are urgently needed.

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.

Nonconvulsive status epilepticus: a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge in the intensive care setting

Nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) comprises a group of syndromes that display a great diversity regarding response to anticonvulsants ranging from virtually self-limiting variants to entirely refractory forms. Therefore, treatment on intensive care units (ICUs) is required only for a selection of cases. The aetiology and clinical form of NCSE are strong predictors for the overall prognosis. Absence status epilepticus is commonly seen in patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy and is rapidly terminated by low-dose of benzodiazepines. The management of complex partial status epilepticus is straightforward in patients with pre-existing epilepsy, but poses major problems if occurring in the context of acute brain lesions. Subtle status epilepticus represents the late stage of undertreated previous overt generalized convulsive status epilepticus and always requires aggressive ICU treatment. Within the intensive care setting, the diagnostic challenge may be seen in the difficulty in delineating nonepileptic conditions such as posthypoxic, metabolic or septic encephalopathies from NCSE. Although all important forms are considered, the focus of this review lies on clinical presentations and electroencephalogram features of comatose patients treated on ICUs and possible diagnostic pitfalls.

A randomized trial for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus

BACKGROUND

Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) has a mortality of 16-39%; coma induction is advocated for its management, but no comparative study has been performed. We aimed to assess the effectiveness (RSE control, adverse events) of the first course of propofol versus barbiturates in the treatment of RSE.

METHODS

In this randomized, single blind, multi-center trial studying adults with RSE not due to cerebral anoxia, medications were titrated toward EEG burst-suppression for 36-48 h and then progressively weaned. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with RSE controlled after a first course of study medication; secondary endpoints included tolerability measures.

RESULTS

The trial was terminated after 3 years, with only 24 patients recruited of the 150 needed; 14 subjects received propofol, 9 barbiturates. The primary endpoint was reached in 43% in the propofol versus 22% in the barbiturates arm (P = 0.40). Mortality (43 vs. 34%; P = 1.00) and return to baseline clinical conditions at 3 months (36 vs. 44%; P = 1.00) were similar. While infections and arterial hypotension did not differ between groups, barbiturate use was associated with a significantly longer mechanical ventilation (P = 0.03). A non-fatal propofol infusion syndrome was detected in one patient, while one subject died of bowel ischemia after barbiturates.

DISCUSSION

Although undersampled, this trial shows significantly longer mechanical ventilation with barbiturates and the occurrence of severe treatment-related complications in both arms. We describe practical issues necessary for the success of future studies needed to improve the current unsatisfactory state of evidence.

Management of intracerebral hemorrhage

Following quickly behind improvements in acute ischemic stroke care have been important advances in the understanding and management of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Among these are accurate diagnosis of cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) during life, recognition of the association between CAA and warfarin-related ICH, use of newer hemostatic treatments, and the combination of minimally invasive surgery with hematoma thrombolysis. Currently recommended management includes prompt evaluation of the patient at a facility with stroke and neurosurgical expertise, consideration of early surgery for patients with clinical deterioration or cerebellar hemorrhages larger than 3 cm, and early treatment of coagulopathies and other neurologic and medical complications. Over the past 2 years, two major randomized studies in ICH (comparing early surgery with best medical management and testing the utility of hemostatic treatment within 4 hours using recombinant factor VIIa) have yielded neutral results. This review focuses on comprehensive management of ICH in light of recent evidence.

Verapamil attenuates the malignant treatment course in recurrent status epilepticus

In the scenario of refractory status epilepticus, the recommended approach of intensive care treatment is limited with respect to the available pharmacodynamic variability and its impeding, severe side effects. Alternative treatment options are therefore urgently needed. In the case described, a patient with nonlesional frontal lobe epilepsy had a high-frequency series of tonic seizures, which evolved into a malignant form of status epilepticus. Co-administration of verapamil, a potent multidrug transporter inhibitor, was followed by significant reduction in seizure frequency. We discuss the putative role of verapamil and the specific risk factors for this malignant treatment course.

[Generalized convulsive status epilepticus in emergency situations in and out of hospital]

Generalized convulsive status epilepticus (GCSE) must be rapidly identified and managed according to pre-established protocols developed by the teams that treat such patients. Close collaboration between emergency specialists, critical-care specialists, electrophysiologists, and neurologists is essential. Overt GCSE, by far the most frequent, is generally easy to diagnose: it must nonetheless be distinguished from pseudo-status epilepticus. Subtle GCSE is difficult to recognize. The initial antiepileptic treatments are fairly well classified but their efficacy is unreliable. If the patient is treated within 5 to 30 minutes after convulsions begin, clonazepam should be administered alone; if the convulsions persist, follow it 5 minutes later with a second injection of clonazepam together with phosphenytoin or phenobarbital. If convulsions began more than 30 minutes before treatment, the initial clonazepam dose should be combined with phosphenytoin or phenobarbital. Relay antiepileptic treatment is essential in the short term as well, unless the cause is immediately reversible. This relay must be immediate if diazepam or midazolam is used alone, because of the high risk of recurrence. Refractory GCSE must be diagnosed very cautiously. Its treatment requires resuscitation using anesthetic agents guided if possible by continuous electroencephalography (EEG), without ever stopping the basic antiepileptic treatment. The cerebral aggression that results from either the status epilepticus itself or its cause must be treated with precision. Treatment of the cause is primordial and, when possible, always the main priority. The etiological investigation must be conducted with tenacity, speed, and perspicacity. GCSE may occur in known epileptics or be the first presentation. The investigation will be negative in 5-10% of cases. Although sometimes difficult to interpret, EEG is essential in numerous situations, in particular, atypical clinical pictures, vigilance disorders that persist after convulsions, and refractory status epilepticus. Overall mortality is on the order of 10%. Prognosis is above all a function of the cause. Age, duration of GCSE symptoms, and the speed and quality of management also affect prognosis. Current guidelines are based only very partially on data and evidence. Defining GCSE at its different stages is an essential prerequisite for the treatment trials that are necessary.

Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS): a tool to orient early treatment strategy

BACKGROUND

Status epilepticus (SE) treatment ranges from small benzodiazepine doses to coma induction. For some SE subgroups, it is unclear how the risk of an aggressive therapeutic approach balances with outcome improvement. We recently developed a prognostic score (Status Epilepticus Severity Score, STESS), relying on four outcome predictors (age, history of seizures, seizure type and extent of consciousness impairment), determined before treatment institution. Our aim was to assess whether the score might have a role in the treatment strategy choice.

METHODS

This cohort study involved adult patients in three centers. For each patient, the STESS was calculated before primary outcome assessment: survival vs. death at discharge. Its ability to predict survival was estimated through the negative predictive value for mortality (NPV). Stratified odds ratios (OR) for mortality were calculated considering coma induction as exposure; strata were defined by the STESS level.

RESULTS

In the observed 154 patients, the STESS had an excellent negative predictive value (0.97). A favorable STESS was highly related to survival (P < 0.001), and to return to baseline clinical condition in survivors (P < 0.001). The combined Mantel-Haenszel OR for mortality in patients stratified after coma induction and their STESS was 1.5 (95 % CI: 0.59-3.83).

CONCLUSION

The STESS reliably identifies SE patients who will survive. Early aggressive treatment could not be routinely warranted in patients with a favorable STESS, who will almost certainly survive their SE episode. A randomized trial using this score would be needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Which anesthetic should be used in the treatment of refractory status epilepticus?

While the treatment of refractory status epilepticus (SE) relies on the use of anesthetic agents, mostly barbiturates, propofol, or midazolam, the study of the available literature discloses that the evidence level is low. Therapeutic coma induction appears straightforward for generalized convulsive or subtle SE, but this approach is debated for complex partial SE. Each anesthetic has its own advocates, and specific advantages and risks; furthermore, several different protocols have been reported regarding the duration and depth of sedation. However, it seems that the biological background of the patient (especially the etiology) remains the main prognostic determinant in SE. There is a clear need of controlled trials regarding this topic.