Repeat treatment of acute hereditary angioedema attacks with open-label icatibant in the FAST-1 trial.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is characterized by potentially life-threatening recurrent episodes of oedema. The open-label extension (OLE) phase of the For Angioedema Subcutaneous Treatment (FAST)-1 trial (NCT00097695) evaluated the efficacy and safety of repeated icatibant exposure in adults with multiple HAE attacks. Following completion of the randomized, controlled phase, patients could receive open-label icatibant (30 mg subcutaneously) for subsequent attacks. The primary end-point was time to onset of primary symptom relief, as assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS). Descriptive statistics were reported for cutaneous/abdominal attacks 1-10 treated in the OLE phase and individual laryngeal attacks. Post-hoc analyses were conducted in patients with ≥ 5 attacks across the controlled and OLE phases. Safety was evaluated throughout. During the OLE phase, 72 patients received icatibant for 340 attacks. For cutaneous/abdominal attacks 1-10, the median time to onset of primary symptom relief was 1·0-2·0 h. For laryngeal attacks 1-12, patient-assessed median time to initial symptom improvement was 0·3-1·2 h. Post-hoc analyses showed the time to onset of symptom relief based on composite VAS was consistent across repeated treatments with icatibant. One injection of icatibant was sufficient to treat 88·2% of attacks; rescue medication was required in 5·3% of attacks. No icatibant-related serious adverse events were reported. Icatibant provided consistent efficacy and was well tolerated for repeated treatment of HAE attacks.

Blood pressure management after acute spinal cord injury.

STANDARDS: There is insufficient evidence to support treatment standards. GUIDELINES: There is insufficient evidence to support treatment guidelines. OPTIONS: Hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg) should be avoided if possible or corrected as soon as possible after acute spinal cord injury. Maintenance of mean arterial blood pressure at 85 to 90 mmHg for the first 7 days after acute spinal cord injury to improve spinal cord perfusion is recommended.

Deep venous thrombosis and thromboembolism in patients with cervical spinal cord injuries.

STANDARDS: Prophylactic treatment of thromboembolism in patients with severe motor deficits due to spinal cord injury is recommended. The use of low-molecular-weight heparins, rotating beds, adjusted dose heparin, or a combination of modalities is recommended as a prophylactic treatment strategy. Low-dose heparin in combination with pneumatic compression stockings or electrical stimulation is recommended as a prophylactic treatment strategy. GUIDELINES: Low-dose heparin therapy alone is not recommended as a prophylactic treatment strategy. Oral anticoagulation alone is not recommended as a prophylactic treatment strategy. OPTIONS: Duplex Doppler ultrasound, impedance plethysmography, and venography are recommended for use as diagnostic tests for deep venous thrombosis in the spinal cord-injured patient population. A 3-month duration of prophylactic treatment for deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism is recommended. Vena cava filters are recommended for patients who do not respond to anticoagulation or who are not candidates for anticoagulation therapy and/or mechanical devices.

Neuroscience education of undergraduate medical students. Part I: role of neurosurgeons as educators.

OBJECT: Economic, demographic, and political pressures have mandated that medical schools increase the number of primary care physicians. The goal of this study was to determine the nature of the average medical student's exposure to neurosurgical issues. METHODS: Surveys were sent to every neurosurgical program director in the United States and to the dean of every medical school in North America, querying the extent of neurosurgical involvement in medical student education. Specifically, the respondents were asked how medical students were educated about the management of low-back pain and radiculopathy, carotid artery disease, head and spine trauma, and headache. Survey results were obtained from 65 (67%) of 97 neurosurgery program directors and from 57 (40%) of 143 medical school deans. Only one program in North America reported having a required neurosurgical rotation for all medical students, and just over 50% (29 of 57 deans and 34 of 65 program directors) reported that neurosurgery was an option in a required neuroscience or surgical subspecialty course. Neurosurgeons were not listed among the top three sources for medical student education in the topics of low-back pain and radiculopathy or carotid artery disease. Neurosurgeons were the most frequently cited source of education regarding head and spinal injuries, despite the fact that the majority of medical schools do not have any required medical student exposure to neurosurgery. CONCLUSIONS: With rare exceptions, neurosurgeons are not significantly involved in the education of medical students concerning the management of common neurosurgical issues. As a result, most emerging primary care physicians are taught about these issues by other specialists or not at all. The implications of this situation are discussed.

Microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia in patients with multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Microvascular decompression (MVD) of the trigeminal nerve is a well-established procedure for the treatment of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. Multiple sclerosis (MS) has long been considered a contraindication for this procedure, due to the known polycentric nature of the disease. Medical treatment followed by percutaneous procedures provide relief for the great majority of these patients. There exists a small subgroup of patients with trigeminal neuralgia who are diagnosed with MS only after a microvascular decompression procedure has been performed. Furthermore, management of the patient with known MS whose pain continues to recur, despite maximal medical therapy and multiple percutaneous procedures, can be exceedingly difficult. METHODS: Five patients with MS, three who had undergone multiple unsuccessful percutaneous procedures and two in whom the diagnosis of MS had not been established, underwent exploration of the cerebellopontine angle. Three patients underwent MVD alone, and two (both with known MS) underwent MVD and partial section of the trigeminal nerve. RESULTS: Patients who underwent microvascular decompression alone did not have satisfactory relief of pain. Patients who underwent partial sectioning of the nerve did better. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MS and symptoms of typical trigeminal neuralgia may benefit from exploration of the cerebellopontine angle and partial sectioning of the nerve. MVD alone fails to provide adequate or reliable relief of pain.