Retention of perampanel in adults with pharmacoresistant epilepsy at a single tertiary care center.

RATIONALE: Observational data on antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) inform about their use in clinical practice. We describe our clinical experience with perampanel (PER) in a large UK tertiary epilepsy center. METHODS: Adults initiated on PER between October 2012 and March 2015 were followed until they discontinued PER or 10 September 2016. Data on epilepsy syndrome, duration, seizure types, concomitant and previous AED use, PER dosing, efficacy and side effects were recorded. Efficacy was categorized as temporary or ongoing (at last follow-up) seizure freedom, ≥50% seizure reduction, or other benefit (e.g. No convulsions or daytime seizures). These categories were mutually exclusive except for people with temporary seizure freedom. RESULTS: 391 received a PER prescription, five of whom never took it. No follow-up data were available for ten. 83% had focal epilepsy. People were prescribed PER in addition to 1-7 (Interquartile range [IQR] 2, 2, 3) AEDs and had previously used up to 18 (IQR 5, 7, 10) AEDs. Total exposure was 639patient/years. Retention rates were 60.4% at one year, 48.3% at two years, and 42.7% at three years. 19 (5%) people reported seizure free periods lasting at least six months. A ≥50% reduction in seizures lasting at least six months was reported by 76 people (20%), and marked improvement for ≥6months was seen in 52 (14%). Five (1%) were taken off other AEDs and continued on PER monotherapy for 4-27months. Seizures were aggravated in 57 (15%). Somatic side effects were reported by 197 (52%), mostly CNS. Mood changes, irritability or challenging behavior were reported by 137 (36%). PER was discontinued by 211 (56%) due to adverse effects (39%), inefficacy (26%), or both (35%). No idiosyncratic adverse events were seen. CONCLUSION: PER resulted in some benefit in 40% of those exposed. Adverse effects on mental health and on balance were common and should be discussed with people before initiating PER.

Improving the handover process in a psychiatry liaison setting.

Efficient handover of patient care is integral to clinical safety. Barriers in communication can lead to adverse outcomes. The Integrated Liaison Assessment Team (ILAT) has a daily handover meeting which presents several challenges to the multidisciplinary liaison team (MDT including high patient turnover, differing staff shift-work patterns, presence of visitors/students and lack of a unified approach to structured discussion at times. Areas identified for improvement included optimising efficiency, structure and handover documentation. Lack of teaching and learning opportunities were also identified. The primary aim was to reduce handover time to 30 min. The secondary aims were to improve communication by introducing the Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation (SBAR) tool, improve team satisfaction and introduce a teaching programme in the time saved. The Model for Improvement methodology was used with MDT focus groups and questionnaires to explore change ideas. This informed our 'Plan, Do, Study, Act' cycles to design a structured handover. Daily measures looked at handover length and individual team member satisfaction. Weekly measures included semiqualitative questionnaires highlighting areas for improvement. Feedback was gathered from emails and MDT discussions. A structured handover format incorporating SBAR, key task allocation and a shift handover lead was introduced. A regular MDT teaching programme was initiated. Over 4 weeks, 'Good' handover ratings increased from 22% to 65%; 'Poor' ratings decreased from 25% to 8%. Mean handover time decreased from 47 min to 31.25 min; a decrease of 33.5%. Overall, the team viewed SBAR positively as an efficiency-promoting tool. Structured handover has promoted staff competencies, team morale and information sharing practices among ILAT. MDT teaching improved team communication and confidence. Sustaining motivation to keep up interventions and documentation of handover were identified as key areas for sustained improvement.

Management of children and young people with idiopathic pituitary stalk thickening, central diabetes insipidus, or both: a national clinical practice consensus guideline.

Unexplained or idiopathic pituitary stalk thickening or central diabetes insipidus not only harbours rare occult malignancies in 40% of cases but can also reflect benign congenital defects. Between 2014 and 2019, a multidisciplinary, expert national guideline development group in the UK systematically developed a management flowchart and clinical practice guideline to inform specialist care and improve outcomes in children and young people (aged <19 years) with idiopathic pituitary stalk thickening, central diabetes insipidus, or both. All such cases of idiopathic pituitary stalk thickening and central diabetes insipidus require dynamic pituitary function testing, specialist pituitary imaging, measurement of serum ß-human chorionic gonadotropin and alpha-fetoprotein concentrations, chest x-ray, abdominal ultrasonography, optometry, and skeletal survey for occult disease. Stalk thickening of 4 mm or more at the optic chiasm, 3 mm or more at pituitary insertion, or both, is potentially pathological, particularly if an endocrinopathy or visual impairment coexists. In this guideline, we define the role of surveillance, cerebrospinal fluid tumour markers, whole-body imaging, indications, timing and risks of stalk biopsy, and criteria for discharge. We encourage a registry of outcomes to validate the systematic approach described in this guideline and research to establish typical paediatric stalk sizes and the possible role of novel biomarkers, imaging techniques, or both, in diagnosis.

Neurosarcoidosis presenting with a partial Claude syndrome.

Neurosarcoidosis when encountered by neurologists most commonly presents as cranial neuropathy, peripheral mononeuropathy,polyneuropathy, myopathy, meningitis or myelopathy. There are limited reports in the current literature on the cases of neurosarcoidosis patients presenting with ischaemic stroke. We discuss a 52-year-old patient with a known previous history of cutaneous sarcoidosis presenting with an acute third nerve palsy, facial weakness and ataxia. His magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain demonstrated focal signal changes in the midbrain consistent with an acute ischaemic event in the region of his third nucleus, suggesting a partial Claude syndrome presentation. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) examination demonstrated an elevated angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) level. We discuss the difficulties associated with confirming a diagnosis for his presentation and consider distinctions in stroke in neurosarcoid and its management in comparison to more common causes.