Relationship between sleep quality and cognitive performance in patients with epilepsy.

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between self-reported sleep quality and cognitive function in patients with epilepsy (PWE), as well as anxiety and depressive symptoms and patient quality of life (QoL). METHODS: This multicenter cross-sectional study included PWE aged ≥12 years who were receiving ≥1 anti-seizure medication (ASM) and had not been diagnosed with a sleep disorder. Patients completed the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test (MoCA), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory-10 (QOLIE-10). RESULTS: The study enrolled 150 patients aged 16-83 years, mean age (standard deviation [SD]) 40.6 (15.2) years; 58.7% were female and 75.3% had focal epilepsy. Mean (SD) PSQI score was 4.71 (3.08), 44.4% of patients had impaired sleep quality (PSQI score ≥5), 19.9% had pathologic excessive daytime sleepiness (ESS score >12), and 32.7% had mild cognitive impairment (MoCA score <26). Within the PSQI, sleep disturbance (P = 0.036) and use of sleep medication (P = 0.006) scores were significantly higher in patients with mild cognitive impairment. Multiple regression analysis showed older age (regression coefficient [B], -0.086; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.127, -0.045; P < 0.001) and the use of sleep medication component of the PSQI [B, -1.157; 95% CI, -2.064, -0.220; P = 0.013) were independently associated with lower MoCA score. Poor sleep quality was associated with probable anxiety and depression symptoms, and directly correlated with reduced QoL. CONCLUSIONS: In PWE, sleep quality was not significantly independently associated with mild cognitive impairment, although poor sleep quality had a negative effect on mood and QoL.

Effectiveness and safety of perampanel monotherapy for focal and generalized tonic-clonic seizures: Experience from a national multicenter registry.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel (PER) monotherapy in routine clinical practice for the treatment of focal onset and generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS). METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective, observational study was conducted in patients aged ≥12 years treated with PER as primary monotherapy or converted to PER monotherapy by progressive reduction of background antiepileptic drugs. Outcomes included retention, responder, and seizure-free rate after 3, 6, and 12 months and tolerability throughout the follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 98 patients (mean age = 49.6 ± 21.7 years, 51% female) with focal seizures and/or GTCS were treated with PER monotherapy for a median exposure of 14 months (range = 1-57) with a median dose of 4 mg (range = 2-10). The retention rates at 3, 6, and 12 months and last follow-up were 93.8%, 89.3%, 80.9%, and 71.4%, respectively. The retention rates according to the type of monotherapy (primary vs conversion) did not differ (log-rank P value = .57). Among the 98 patients, 61.2% patients had seizures throughout the baseline period, with a median seizure frequency of 0.6 seizures per month (range = 0.3-26). Responder rates at 3, 6, and 12 months were 79.6%, 70.1%, and 52.8%, respectively, and seizure freedom rates at the same points were 62.7%, 56.1%, and 41.5%. Regarding the 33 patients who had GTCS in the baseline period, 87.8% were seizure-free at 3 months, 78.1% at 6 months, and 55.1% at 12 months. Over the entire follow-up, PER monotherapy was generally well tolerated, and only 16% of patients discontinued PER due to adverse events (AEs). Female patients were found to be at a higher risk of psychiatric AEs (female vs male odds ratio = 2.85, 95% confidence interval = 1-8.33, P = .046). SIGNIFICANCE: PER demonstrated good effectiveness and a good safety profile when used as primary therapy or conversion to monotherapy at relatively low doses, in a clinical setting with patients with focal seizures and GTCS.

Adult Prevalence of Epilepsy in Spain: EPIBERIA, a Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: This study assesses the lifetime and active prevalence of epilepsy in Spain in people older than 18 years. METHODS: EPIBERIA is a population-based epidemiological study of epilepsy prevalence using data from three representative Spanish regions (health districts in Zaragoza, Almería, and Seville) between 2012 and 2013. The study consisted of two phases: screening and confirmation. Participants completed a previously validated questionnaire (EPIBERIA questionnaire) over the telephone. RESULTS: A total of 1741 valid questionnaires were obtained, including 261 (14.99%) raising a suspicion of epilepsy. Of these suspected cases, 216 (82.75%) agreed to participate in phase 2. Of the phase 2 participants, 22 met the International League Against Epilepsy's diagnostic criteria for epilepsy. The estimated lifetime prevalence, adjusted by age and sex per 1,000 people, was 14.87 (95% CI: 9.8-21.9). Active prevalence was 5.79 (95% CI: 2.8-10.6). No significant age, sex, or regional differences in prevalence were detected. CONCLUSIONS: EPIBERIA provides the most accurate estimate of epilepsy prevalence in the Mediterranean region based on its original methodology and its adherence to ILAE recommendations. We highlight that the lifetime prevalence and inactive epilepsy prevalence figures observed here were compared to other epidemiological studies.

Analysis of factors influencing telephone call response rate in an epidemiological study.

Descriptive epidemiology research involves collecting data from large numbers of subjects. Obtaining these data requires approaches designed to achieve maximum participation or response rates among respondents possessing the desired information. We analyze participation and response rates in a population-based epidemiological study though a telephone survey and identify factors implicated in consenting to participate. Rates found exceeded those reported in the literature and they were higher for afternoon calls than for morning calls. Women and subjects older than 40 years were the most likely to answer the telephone. The study identified geographical differences, with higher RRs in districts in southern Spain that are not considered urbanized. This information may be helpful for designing more efficient community epidemiology projects.

Circadian rhythm of blood pressure in patients with drug-resistant mesial temporal lobe epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients with drug-resistant mesial temporal lobe epilepsy present with an alteration in the autonomic circadian regulation of blood pressure. METHODS: A prospective case‒control study was designed, with a case group comprising patients with drug-resistant mesial temporal lobe epilepsy and a control group comprising healthy volunteers. Twenty-four-hour outpatient blood pressure monitoring was performed to assess the existence of a normal (dipping) or altered (non-dipping) circadian pattern. In addition, analytical and ultrasound parameters (carotid intima-media thickness) of vascular risk and sleep quality were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-four subjects were recruited in each study group, amongst whom no demographic differences or history of vascular risk were observed. A higher percentage of participants with a non-dipping pattern was observed in the group of patients with epilepsy (62.5% vs. 12.5, p = 0.001). In the case group, significant differences were also observed in carotid intima-media thickness, with a greater probability of presenting with pathological values (p = 0.022). CONCLUSION: The results suggest a disorder of the central autonomic control of blood pressure in patients with drug-resistant mesial temporal lobe epilepsy, with a greater probability of developing an alteration of the circadian rhythm of blood pressure. This dysfunction may be a factor involved in the increased cardiovascular risk in this population.

Management of Patients With Unclassified Epileptic Seizures in Outpatient Clinics in Spain. Results of the RETO Study.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine the approach and management of specialists in patients with unclassified epileptic seizures in outpatient clinics in Spain. METHODS: Observational, multicenter, and cross-sectional study. Ninety-three neurologists or neuropediatricians documented consecutive patients with a history of at least two difficult to classify or unclassified epileptic seizures. Patient demographics, quality of life (QOLIE-10-P), disease characteristics, and anticonvulsant treatment were captured. Physicians were asked about their therapeutic approach for the selection of an antiepileptic drug and underlying reasons. RESULTS: A total of 725 patients were included. At the time of the survey, 81% were treated (69% with monotherapy). Most frequently given reasons for starting antiepileptic therapy were ([mean] on a scale of 1­5) efficacy, (3.9), safety (3.61), and broad-spectrum effectiveness (3.5). Reasons given for switching therapy (226/725) included need for broader spectrum of action: 70 (31.0%); simpler dosing regimen: 25 (11.1%); quality of life considerations: 24 (10.6%); lack of adherence to therapy: 24 (10.6%); comorbidities: 13 (5.8%); drug interactions: 12 (5.3%); and possibility of pregnancy 6 (2.7%). CONCLUSIONS: When deciding on starting or switching therapy for patients with difficult to classify or unclassified epilepsy, the most important consideration for the specialists included efficacy, safety, and broad-spectrum efficacy.

Familial association of genetic generalised epilepsy with limb-girdle muscular dystrophy through a mutation in CAPN3.

•We present a family that includes members with phenotypes of generalized epilepsy and limb-girdle muscular dystrophy.•Subjects with heterozygous mutation developed epilepsy; a subject with homozygous mutation developed limb-girdle dystrophy.•Mutations in CAPN3 may play a role in the complex genetics of genetic generalized epilepsies.

Eslicarbazepine acetate and carotid intima-media thickness in epileptic patients.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate if eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in combination with other non-inducer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in the treatment of epilepsy may represent a positive impact in the cardiovascular risk profile. METHODS: multicentre, retrospective, observational, non-interventional, real-life study comparing patients treated with cytochrome P450 (CYP) inducer vs. ESL plus non-inducer AEDs. Primary endpoint: Carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) measured following the Manheim Consensus criteria. RESULTS: Patients included: 163. The main demographic, clinical and vascular risk parameters were comparable between the two groups except for duration of the disease, prevalence of dyslipidemia and use of lipid-lowering drugs (significantly higher in the inducers group) and number of previous antiepileptic drugs (significantly higher in the non-inducers group). Bivariate analysis of the main endpoint showed almost significant differences (p=0.05) in CIMT measures favourable to non-inducers (average 0.617mm+SD=0.148) vs. inducers (average 0.663mm+SD=0.147). Other variables reaching statistical significance were: age >50 years (p<0.001), high blood pressure (p<0.01) and dyslipidemia (p<0.05). A multivariate analysis including these variables and biochemical vascular risk factors showed a predictor model including two variables: inducers group (p=0.031; Coefficient ß=0.234) and age >50 years (p=0.001; Coefficient ß=0.387). Regarding gender, the mean CIMT in males was significantly higher in the inducers (0.693mm; SD=0.139) than in the non- inducers groups (0.628mm; SD=0.151; p<0.05). In females the differences were not significant. SIGNIFICANCE: The use of CYP inducer AEDs is associated with a significant increase in CIMT as compared with ESL and other non-inducer AEDs. The study shows a decrease in the vascular risk measured by ultrasound criteria in male patients treated with ESL compared with patients treated with inducer AEDs.

One-year clinical experience of perampanel in Spain: a multicentre study of efficacy and tolerability.

Perampanel, a non-competitive antagonist of the α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole-propionic acid receptors, is the most recent antiepileptic drug available in Spain, marketed in January 2014. It was initially approved by the European Medicines Agency as adjunctive treatment for partial-onset seizures in patients 12 years and older, but recently also for primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Although clinical trials provide essential information about the drug, they do not reflect daily clinical practice. This retrospective study shows the initial experience with perampanel in 11 Spanish hospitals during its first year post-commercialisation. All patients who started perampanel treatment were included, but efficacy and tolerability were only assessed in those patients with a minimum follow-up period of six months. In total, 256 patients were treated with perampanel before September 2014, and 253 had an observational period of one year. After six months, 216/256 patients (84%) continued on perampanel and 180/253 (71.1%) completed one year of treatment. The mean number of previous antiepileptic drugs used was 6.83 and the median number of concomitant antiepileptic drugs was 2. The mean perampanel dose was 7.06 mg and 8.26 mg at six and 12 months, respectively. The responder rate was 39.5% and 35.9% at both follow-up points, respectively. Adverse events were experienced by 91/253 (35.5%) and resulted in withdrawal in 37 (14.6%). The most common adverse events were somnolence, dizziness, and irritability. We found no significant differences between concomitant use of enzyme-inducing and non-inducing antiepileptic drugs, regarding efficacy, adverse effects, or withdrawals. Irritability was not influenced by concomitant use of levetiracetam, relative to other drugs, but was more frequently observed in patients with a history of psychiatric problems or learning disabilities.

Encefalitis Límbica Autoinmune Asociada A Anticuerpos LGI1: Presentación De Un Caso Y Revisión De La Bibliografía / Autoimmune Limbic Encephalitis Associated With LGI1 Antibodies: Case Report And Review Of The Literature

RESUMEN Introducción: La encefalitis asociada a anticuerpos dirigidos contra la proteína 1 inactivada del glioma rica en leucina (LGI1) es una entidad poco frecuente de inicio subagudo que se caracteriza clínicamente por la presencia de alteraciones cognitivas, alteraciones conductuales y crisis epilépticas. El pronóstico en la mayoría de los casos es favorable, aunque son frecuentes los déficits amnésicos residuales. Caso clínico: Mujer de 76 años que comenzó de manera súbita con una serie de crisis tónico - clónicas generalizadas y posterior alteración del nivel de consciencia. Se inició tratamiento anticonvulsivante con discreta mejoría clínica. En la resonancia magnética realizada durante el ingreso se observó hiperintensidad en hipocampo izquierdo en secuencias T2 y T2-FLAIR. Ante la sospecha de encefalitis límbica autoinmune se inició tratamiento inmunomodulador con corticoesteriodes e inmunoglobulinas con mejoría clínica. Posteriormente se detectaron anticuerpos anti - LGI1 en líquido cefalorraquídeo. Conclusiones: La encefalitis autoinmune asociada a anticuerpos anti-LGI1 puede producir clínica neurológica variada y orden de instauración variable, incluso en ocasiones agudo. El tratamiento con inmunoterapia precoz es importante tanto para la mejoría clínica en la fase aguda como para el pronóstico a largo plazo.

Abstract Introduction: Leucine rich glioma inactivated protein 1 (LGI1) antibody encephalitis is a rare disease characterized by subacute memory impairment, behavioral disorders and epileptic seizures. Even most cases have a good outcome, residual cognitive deficits are common. Case report: 76-year-old woman who started with acute onset generalized tonic - clonic seizures and subsequent impaired level of consciousness. Antiepileptic treatment was started with slight clinical improvement. In magnetic resonance imaging performed during admission left hippocampal hyperintensity was seen in T2 and T2-FLAIR sequences. As autoimmune limbic encephalitis was suspected, immunomodulatory treatment with intravenous corticosteroids and immunoglobulins was started with clinical improvement. Afterwards, anti -LGI1 antibodies were positive in cerebrospinal fluid testing. Conclusions: anti - LGI1 antibody related encephalitis can produce different neurological manifestations and diverse onset, even acute. Early immunomodulatory treatment is important to improve both clinical manifestations and long - term outcome.

[A comparative study of the effectiveness of topiramate and flunarizine in independent series of chronic migraine patients without medication abuse]. / Estudio comparativo de la efectividad del topiramato y la flunaricina en series independientes de pacientes con migraña cronica sin abuso de medicacion.

INTRODUCTION: Topiramate and onabotulinumtoxin A have proven to be effective in chronic migraine with or without medication abuse according to recent criteria of the International Headache Society's Headache Classification. AIMS: To show that flunarizine is as effective as topiramate in cases of chronic migraine without medication abuse. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective, non-randomised, comparative study of two groups of patients paired by age and sex, with chronic migraine without abuse, who had been treated preventively for the first time with topiramate or flunarizine. RESULTS: Forty patients treated with flunarizine were assigned a patient of their same sex and age who was being treated with topiramate. The mean rate of reduction in intense migraines in the topiramate group was 59% and in the flunarizine group, 58.5% (p = 0.9444); the responder rate at four months of treatment did not show any significant differences either, the figures being 75% for topiramate and 70% for flunarizine (p = 0.6236). The mean reduction of other headaches in the topiramate group was 57% and in the flunarizine group, 64% (p = 0.4261); the responder rate at four months of treatment was similar in the two groups: 76%. The percentage of dropouts from treatment was higher with topiramate (19.5%) than with flunarizine (10%) (p = 0.3493). No serious side effects occurred in either of the groups. In all, 78.9% of the patients who took topiramate said they were satisfied with the drug versus 75% of those in the flunarizine group (p = 0.7903). CONCLUSIONS: Flunarizine proved to be as effective as topiramate in the treatment of chronic migraine without medication abuse.

TITLE: Estudio comparativo de la efectividad del topiramato y la flunaricina en series independientes de pacientes con migraña cronica sin abuso de medicacion.Introduccion. El topiramato y la onabotulinumtoxina A han mostrado ser eficaces en la migraña cronica con o sin abuso de farmacos segun los criterios recientes de la Clasificacion de Cefaleas de la Sociedad Internacional de Cefaleas. Objetivo. Demostrar que la flunaricina es tan efectiva como el topiramato en la migraña cronica sin abuso de farmacos. Pacientes y metodos. Estudio prospectivo, no aleatorizado, comparativo de dos grupos de pacientes con similar edad y sexo, con migraña cronica sin abuso, tratados preventivamente por primera vez con topiramato o flunaricina. Resultados. A 40 pacientes tratados con flunaricina se les asigno un paciente del mismo sexo y edad tratado con topiramato. La media de reduccion de las migrañas intensas en el grupo del topiramato fue del 59% y en el grupo de la flunaricina, del 58,5% (p = 0,9444); la tasa de respondedores al cuarto mes de tratamiento tampoco mostro diferencias significativas, ya que fue del 75% para el topiramato y del 70% para la flunaricina (p = 0,6236). La media de reduccion de otras cefaleas en el grupo del topiramato fue del 57%, y en el grupo de la flunaricina, del 64% (p = 0,4261); la tasa de respondedores al cuarto mes de tratamiento fue del 76%, similar en ambos grupos. El porcentaje de abandonos del tratamiento fue mayor con el topiramato (19,5%) que con la flunaricina (10%) (p = 0,3493). En ninguno de los dos grupos hubo efectos adversos graves. Un 78,9% de los pacientes que tomo topiramato presento satisfaccion con el farmaco frente al 75% del grupo de la flunaricina (p = 0,7903). Conclusion. La flunaricina mostro ser tan efectiva como el topiramato en el tratamiento de la migraña cronica sin abuso de farmacos.

[Comparative study of the effectiveness of topiramate and nadolol in the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in independent series of patients]. / Estudio comparativo de la efectividad del topiramato y del nadolol en el tratamiento preventivo de la migraña episodica en series independientes de pacientes.

INTRODUCTION: Topiramate and nadolol with levels A and C of scientific evidence, respectively, would be indicated as preventive treatments of migraine. To date only one study of satisfaction has been carried out to compare the two pharmaceuticals. AIM: To compare the effectiveness parameters in independent groups of patients treated preventively with one of the pharmaceuticals from the study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a database of 700 patients with migraine, those with episodic migraine and who had followed a course of preventive treatment, for the first time, with topiramate or nadolol were selected for the study. The effectiveness variables (reduction in the number of crises at four months of preventive treatment and responder rates) were analysed. RESULTS: Altogether 208 patients with were included for treatment: 140 with topiramate (77.8% females; mean age, 37.9) and 68 with nadolol (69% females; mean age, 36.9). The mean number of crises in the month prior to treatment was: topiramate group, 6.3 +/- 2.6; nadolol group 5.3 +/- 2.0 (p = 0.0066). At four months after starting treatment: topiramate group, 2.69 +/- 2.6; nadolol group 2.6 +/- 2.2 (NS). The percentage of reduction in the number of migraines was 56.6% with topiramate and 51.6% with nadolol (NS). The responder rate (reduction in the frequency of crises by at least 50%) was 71.3% with topiramate versus 69% with nadolol (NS). The excellent response rate (reduction in crises by at least 75%) was 53.3% with topiramate versus 32.2% with nadolol (p = 0.0077). Adverse side effects were reported by 54% of patients treated with topiramate versus 30.8% of those treated with nadolol (p = 0.0015). The rate of satisfaction was 61% for the topiramate group and 71% for the group with nadolol (NS). CONCLUSIONS: Both topiramate and nadolol proved to be effective in the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. Topiramate was found to be more effective than nadolol, although it was used in patients with a higher frequency of crises, and was not tolerated so well.

[Intracranial aneurysms and epilepsy]. / Aneurismas intracraneales y epilepsia.

TITLE: Aneurismas intracraneales y epilepsia.

Mioclonías propioespinales como causa de insomnio grave / Propriospinal myoclonus causing severe insomnia

No disponible

¿El abuso de fármacos en pacientes con migraña crónica influye en la efectividad del tratamiento preventivo con topiramato? / Does medication abuse in patients with chronic migraine influence the effectiveness of preventive treatment with topiramate?

Introducción. Los pacientes con migraña crónica (MC) y abuso de medicación son difíciles de tratar y tienen peor calidad de vida que otros pacientes con migrañas. Objetivo. Valorar si la presencia de abuso de fármacos disminuye la efectividad del topiramato. Pacientes y métodos. Una serie de pacientes con MC fueron agrupados según presentasen criterios de abuso o no abuso de fármacos. Se les aconsejo la supresión del fármaco del cual abusaban. Se ajustó el tratamiento de sus crisis y se inició tratamiento preventivo desde el principio con topiramato. Se valoró el número días con cefalea y migrañas intensas en el mes previo y al cuarto mes de tratamiento. Resultados. Fueron seleccionados 262 pacientes con criterios de MC, y de ellos 167 (63,7%) cumplieron criterios de abuso. En ambos grupos hubo una reducción significativa del número de días con cefalea/mes y numero de crisis de migraña/mes al cuarto mes de tratamiento con topiramato. Porcentaje de reducción de días con cefalea/mes en MC sin abuso, 59,3} 36,1%; y con abuso, 48,7} 41,7% (p = 0,0574). Porcentaje de reducción de migrañas intensas/mes en MC sin abuso, 61,2%; y con abuso, 50% (p = 0,0224). Tasa de respondedores según numero de días con cefalea/mes en MC sin abuso, 69%; y con abuso, 57%. Tasa de respondedores según numero de migrañas intensas/mes en MC sin abuso, 76,8%; y en MC con abuso, 61% (p = 0,0097). Conclusiones. El topiramato fue efectivo en pacientes con MC sin y con abuso de fármacos, aunque con menor efectividad en estos últimos (AU)

Introduction: Patients with chronic migraine (CM) and medication abuse are difficult to treat, and have a greater tendency towards chronification and a poorer quality of life than those with other types of headache. Aim: To evaluate whether the presence of medication abuse lowers the effectiveness of topiramate. Patients and methods: A series of patients with CM were grouped according to whether they met abuse criteria or not. They were advised to stop taking the drug that they were abusing. Treatment was adjusted to match their crises and preventive treatment with topiramate was established from the beginning. The number of days with headache and intense migraine in the previous month and at four months of treatment was evaluated. Results. In all, 262 patients with CM criteria were selected and 167 (63.7%) of them fulfilled abuse criteria. In both groups there was a significant reduction in the number of days with headache/month and number of migraine attacks/month at the fourth month of treatment with topiramate. The percentage of reduction in the number of days with headache/ month in CM without abuse was 59.3} 36.1%, and with abuse, 48.7} 41.7% (p = 0.0574). The percentage of reduction in the number of days with intense migraine/month in CM without abuse was 61.2%, and with abuse, 50% (p = 0.0224). Response rate according to the number of days with headache/month in CM without abuse was 69%, and with abuse, 57%. Response rate according to the number of intense migraines/month in CM without abuse was 76.8%, and in CM with abuse, 61% (p = 0.0097). Conclusions. Topiramate was effective in patients with CM with and without medication abuse, although effectiveness is lower in the latter case (AU)

Estudio comparativo de la efectividad del topiramato y la flunaricina en series independientes de pacientes con migraña crónica sin abuso de medicación / A comparative study of the effectiveness of topiramate and flunarizine in independent series of chronic migraine patients without medication abuse

Introducción. El topiramato y la onabotulinumtoxina A han mostrado ser eficaces en la migraña crónica con o sin abuso de fármacos según los criterios recientes de la Clasificación de Cefaleas de la Sociedad Internacional de Cefaleas. Objetivo. Demostrar que la flunaricina es tan efectiva como el topiramato en la migraña crónica sin abuso de fármacos.Pacientes y métodos. Estudio prospectivo, no aleatorizado, comparativo de dos grupos de pacientes con similar edad ysexo, con migraña crónica sin abuso, tratados preventivamente por primera vez con topiramato o flunaricina. Resultados. A 40 pacientes tratados con flunaricina se les asignó un paciente del mismo sexo y edad tratado con topiramato. La media de reducción de las migrañas intensas en el grupo del topiramato fue del 59% y en el grupo de la flunaricina, del 58,5% (p = 0,9444); la tasa de respondedores al cuarto mes de tratamiento tampoco mostró diferencias significativas, ya que fue del 75% para el topiramato y del 70% para la flunaricina (p = 0,6236). La media de reducción de otras cefaleas en el grupo del topiramato fue del 57%, y en el grupo de la flunaricina, del 64% (p = 0,4261); la tasa de respondedores al cuarto mes de tratamiento fue del 76%, similar en ambos grupos. El porcentaje de abandonos del tratamiento fue mayor con el topiramato (19,5%) que con la flunaricina (10%) (p = 0,3493). En ninguno de los dos grupos hubo efectos adversos graves. Un 78,9% de los pacientes que tomó topiramato presentó satisfacción con el fármaco frente al 75% del grupo de la flunaricina (p = 0,7903). Conclusión. La flunaricina mostró ser tan efectiva como el topiramato en el tratamiento de la migraña crónica sin abuso de fármacos (AU)

Introduction. Topiramate and onabotulinumtoxin A have proven to be effective in chronic migraine with or without medication abuse according to recent criteria of the International Headache Society’s Headache Classification. Aims. To show that flunarizine is as effective as topiramate in cases of chronic migraine without medication abuse. Patients and methods. We conducted a prospective, non-randomised, comparative study of two groups of patients paired by age and sex, with chronic migraine without abuse, who had been treated preventively for the first time with topiramate or flunarizine. Results. Forty patients treated with flunarizine were assigned a patient of their same sex and age who was being treated with topiramate. The mean rate of reduction in intense migraines in the topiramate group was 59% and in the flunarizine group, 58.5% (p = 0.9444); the responder rate at four months of treatment did not show any significant differences either, the figures being 75% for topiramate and 70% for flunarizine (p = 0.6236). The mean reduction of other headaches in the topiramate group was 57% and in the flunarizine group, 64% (p = 0.4261); the responder rate at four months of treatment was similar in the two groups: 76%. The percentage of dropouts from treatment was higher with topiramate (19.5%) than with flunarizine (10%) (p = 0.3493). No serious side effects occurred in either of the groups. In all, 78.9% of the patients who took topiramate said they were satisfied with the drug versus 75% of those in the flunarizine group (p = 0.7903). Conclusions. Flunarizine proved to be as effective as topiramate in the treatment of chronic migraine without medication abuse (AU)

Aneurismas intracraneales y epilepsia / Intracranial aneurysms and epilepsy

No disponible

Estudio comparativo de la efectividad del topiramato y del nadolol en el tratamiento preventivo de la migraña episódica en series independientes de pacientes / Comparative study of the effectiveness of topiramate and nadolol in the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in independent series of patients

Introducción. El topiramato con nivel A y el nadolol con nivel C de evidencia científica estarían indicados como tratamientos preventivos de la migraña. Sólo existe un estudio de satisfacción que compare ambos fármacos. Objetivo. Comparar los parámetros de efectividad en grupos independientes de pacientes tratados preventivamente con uno de los fármacos del estudio. Pacientes y métodos. De una base de datos de 700 pacientes con migraña, se seleccionaron aquéllos con migraña episódica y que habían llevado tratamiento preventivo, por primera vez, con topiramato o nadolol. Se analizaron las variables de efectividad (reducción del número de crisis al cuarto mes de tratamiento preventivo y tasa de respondedores). Resultados. Fueron incluidos 208 pacientes con intención de tratar; 140 con topiramato (77,8% mujeres; edad media: 37,9 años) y 68 con nadolol (69% mujeres; edad media: 36,9 años). La media de crisis en el mes previo al tratamiento fue: grupo con topiramato, 6,3 ± 2,6; grupo con nadolol, 5,3 ± 2,0 (p = 0,0066). Al cuarto mes de tratamiento: grupo con topiramato, 2,69 ± 2,6; grupo con nadolol, 2,6 ± 2,2 (NS). El porcentaje de reducción de migrañas fue del 56,6% con topiramato y del 51,6% con nadolol (NS). La tasa de respondedores (reducción en la frecuencia de crisis al menos del 50%) fue del 71,3% con topiramato y del 69% con nadolol (NS). La tasa de respuesta excelente (reducción de las crisis al menos un 75%) fue del 53,3% con topiramato y del 32,2% con nadolol (p = 0,0077). El 54% de los pacientes tratados con topiramato y el 30,8% de los pacientes tratados con nadolol presentaron efectos adversos (p = 0,0015). La tasa de satisfacción fue del 61% en el grupo de topiramato y del 71% en el grupo de nadolol (NS). Conclusión. El topiramato y el nadolol mostraron ser efectivos en el tratamiento preventivo de la migraña episódica. El topiramato mostró mayor efectividad y se utilizó en pacientes con mayor frecuencia de crisis, pero se toleró peor que el nadolol (AU)

Introduction. Topiramate and nadolol with levels A and C of scientific evidence, respectively, would be indicated as preventive treatments of migraine. To date only one study of satisfaction has been carried out to compare the two pharmaceuticals. Aim. To compare the effectiveness parameters in independent groups of patients treated preventively with one of the pharmaceuticals from the study. Patients and methods. From a database of 700 patients with migraine, those with episodic migraine and who had followed a course of preventive treatment, for the first time, with topiramate or nadolol were selected for the study. The effectiveness variables (reduction in the number of crises at four months of preventive treatment and responder rates) were analysed. Results. Altogether 208 patients with were included for treatment: 140 with topiramate (77.8% females; mean age, 37.9) and 68 with nadolol (69% females; mean age, 36.9). The mean number of crises in the month prior to treatment was: topiramate group, 6.3 ± 2.6; nadolol group 5.3 ± 2.0 (p = 0.0066). At four months after starting treatment: topiramate group, 2.69 ± 2.6; nadolol group 2.6 ± 2.2 (NS). The percentage of reduction in the number of migraines was 56.6% with topiramate and 51.6% with nadolol (NS). The responder rate (reduction in the frequency of crises by at least 50%) was 71.3% with topiramate versus 69% with nadolol (NS). The excellent response rate (reduction in crises by at least 75%) was 53.3% with topiramate versus 32.2% with nadolol (p = 0.0077). Adverse side effects were reported by 54% of patients treated with topiramate versus 30.8% of those treated with nadolol (p = 0.0015). The rate of satisfaction was 61% for the topiramate group and 71% for the group with nadolol (NS). Conclusions. Both topiramate and nadolol proved to be effective in the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. Topiramate was found to be more effective than nadolol, although it was used in patients with a higher frequency of crises, and was not tolerated so well (AU)

Fisiología del envejecimiento y del estrés oxidativo (B40) / No disponible

No disponible