Implicaciones de iniciar fármacos antiepilépticos previo a la realización de EEG en primeras crisis epilépticas / Implications of initiating antiseizure drugs prior to the performance of EEG in first epileptic seizures

Introducción: Determinar si la administración de fármacos antiepilépticos (FAE) puede alterar la probabilidad de encontrar anomalías epileptiformes en EEG realizados de forma precoz tras una primera crisis epiléptica (CE). Método: Estudio observacional retrospectivo en el que se incluyó a los pacientes atendidos en urgencias de nuestro centro por una primera CE entre julio del 2014 y noviembre del 2019. Se recogieron los datos clínicos, las características técnicas de adquisición e interpretación de los EEG efectuados durante las primeras 72 h tras la CE y los factores relacionados con la recurrencia. Resultados: Se recogieron 155 pacientes; edad media 48,6 ±22,5 años; 61,3% hombres. El 51% presentó crisis tónico-clónicas de inicio desconocido y el 12% focales con progresión a tónico-clónica bilateral. El 25,2% (39/155) recibió tratamiento con FAE antes de la realización del EEG; en 33 pacientes se administró un FAE no benzodiacepínico y en 6 una benzodiacepina. Se observaron anomalías epileptiformes en 29,7% de los pacientes. La administración previa de FAE no se asoció de forma significativa ni con la probabilidad de detectar anomalías epileptiformes (p = 0,25) ni con el riesgo de recurrencia a los 6 meses (p = 0,63). Conclusiones: La administración de un FAE previo a la realización del EEG precoz tras una primera CE no disminuye la probabilidad de detectar anomalías epileptiformes. Estos hallazgos sugieren que iniciar un FAE de forma inmediata en aquellos pacientes con alto riesgo de recurrencia precoz no implica un menor rendimiento diagnóstico de dicha prueba.(AU)

Introduction: This study aimed to determine whether the administration of antiepileptic drugs (AED) alters the likelihood of detecting epileptiform abnormalities in electroencephalographies (EEG) performed early after a first epileptic seizure. Method: We performed a retrospective, observational study including patients with a first seizure attended at our centre's emergency department between July 2014 and November 2019. We collected clinical data, as well as technical data on the acquisition and interpretation of the EEG performed within the first 72 hours after the seizure, and the factors related with seizure recurrence. Results: We recruited 155 patients with a mean (SD) age of 48.6 (22.5) years; 61.3% were men. Regarding seizure type, 51% presented tonic-clonic seizures of unknown onset and 12% presented focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures. Thirty-nine patients (25.2%) received AED treatment before the EEG was performed: 33 received a non-benzodiazepine AED and 6 received a benzodiazepine. Epileptiform abnormalities were observed in 29.7% of patients. Previous administration of AEDs was not significantly associated with the probability of detecting interictal epileptiform abnormalities (P=.25) or with the risk of recurrence within 6 months (P=.63). Conclusions: Administration of AEDs before an early EEG following a first seizure does not decrease the likelihood of detecting epileptiform abnormalities. These findings suggest that starting AED treatment immediately in patients with a high risk of early recurrence does not imply a reduction in the diagnostic accuracy of the test.(AU)

Implications of starting antiepileptic treatment prior to electroencephalography in first epileptic seizures.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to determine whether the administration of antiepileptic drugs (AED) alters the likelihood of detecting epileptiform abnormalities in electroencephalographies (EEG) performed early after a first epileptic seizure. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, observational study including patients with a first seizure attended at our centre's emergency department between July 2014 and November 2019. We collected clinical data, as well as technical data on the acquisition and interpretation of the EEG performed within the first 72 hours after the seizure, and the factors related with seizure recurrence. RESULTS: We recruited 155 patients with a mean (SD) age of 48.6 (22.5) years; 61.3% were men. Regarding seizure type, 51% presented tonic-clonic seizures of unknown onset and 12% presented focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures. Thirty-nine patients (25.2%) received AED treatment before the EEG was performed: 33 received a non-benzodiazepine AED and 6 received a benzodiazepine. Epileptiform abnormalities were observed in 29.7% of patients. Previous administration of AEDs was not significantly associated with the probability of detecting interictal epileptiform abnormalities (P = .25) or with the risk of recurrence within 6 months (P = .63). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of AEDs before an early EEG following a first seizure does not decrease the likelihood of detecting epileptiform abnormalities. These findings suggest that starting AED treatment immediately in patients with a high risk of early recurrence does not imply a reduction in the diagnostic accuracy of the test.

Wait and see en epilepsia pediátrica. Nuestra experiencia / Wait and see in paediatric epilepsy. Our experience

Introducción: El tratamiento farmacológico de la epilepsia no es curativo; pretende, en lo posible, evitar crisis en niños que probablemente van a seguir teniéndolas. Pacientes y métodos: El objeto es analizar nuestra experiencia en niños con epilepsia y con primera crisis no sintomática aguda no tratados con antiepilépticos. Se analizó a pacientes atendidos en una consulta de neuropediatría, desde 2017 hasta 2021, que habían sufrido una o más crisis no sintomáticas agudas y a los que no se les había tratado farmacológicamente. Resultados: Sesenta y cinco pacientes cumplieron los criterios de selección. Veinticuatro habían tenido una única crisis, con un tiempo medio de duración de 12 minutos (1-60). En un 66,7% fue nocturna. Un 41,7% presentó electroencefalograma patológico, y un 21%, hallazgos patológicos en la neuroimagen. El tiempo medio de control fue de 2,7 años (0,003-13,6 años). Cuarenta y uno presentaron más de una crisis, con una duración media de nueve minutos (1-60). Cinco pacientes presentaron más de 20 crisis, y el resto, entre dos y 17. Veinticuatro (58,5%) presentaron únicamente crisis nocturnas. Se realizó un electroencefalograma en todos: grafoelementos epileptiformes en el 63,4%; y neuroimagen en todos: patológica en el 4,9%. El tiempo medio de control fue de 3,8 años (0,01-9,1 años). Conclusiones: La frecuencia de las crisis, la patología de base o los resultados de las pruebas complementarias no deberían ser las únicas variables que habría que considerar para iniciar el tratamiento farmacológico antiepiléptico en los niños. Debería prevalecer, por encima de aquéllos, el potencial perjuicio sobre la calidad de vida y el neurodesarrollo, las funciones atencionales y el comportamiento del niño, y siempre consensuar esta decisión con los padres.(AU)

Introduction: Pharmacological treatment of epilepsy is not healing; it tries to avoid seizures, as far as possible, in children who probably would still have them. Patients and methods: Our purpose is to analyse our experience with epileptic children and those who have a first non-symptomatic seizure without pharmacological treatment. Patients seen in a paediatric neurology consultation, from 2017 to 2021, who had suffered one or more acute non-symptomatic crises and who had not been treated pharmacologically, were analysed. Results: Sixty-five patients meet the selection criteria. Twenty-four patients had had a single crisis with a mean duration of 12 minutes (1-60). In 66.7% it was nocturnal. 41.7% presented pathological electroencephalogram, and 21% pathological findings in neuroimaging. The mean control time was 2.7 years (0.003-13.6 years). Forty-one presented more than one crisis, with a mean duration of nine minutes (1-60). Five patients presented more than 20 seizures, the rest between two and 17. Twenty-four (58.5%) presented only nocturnal seizures. An electroencephalogram was performed in all: epileptiform graphoelements in 63.4%; and neuroimaging in all: pathological in 4.9%. Mean control time was 3.8 years (0.01-9.1 years). Conclusions: Seizure frequency, underlying pathology or test results should not be the only variables to take into consideration when starting antiepileptic drug treatment. The repercussion on their quality of life and neurodevelopment should prevail, agreeing on this decision with the parents.(AU)

Focal status epilepticus: a review of pharmacological treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency associated with high morbidity and mortality. One prognostic factor is the type of SE. The purpose of this review is to analyse the most recent recommendations of different scientific societies and expert groups on the treatment of SE, and the latest studies, to assess the literature on the management of focal SE. METHODS: We searched PubMed for studies published between 1 August 2008 and 1 August 2018 on the pharmacological treatment of focal SE and its different types in adults. RESULTS: We identified 29 publications among reviews, treatment guidelines, meta-analyses, clinical trials, and case series on the treatment of SE. Only 3 of them accounted for whether SE was focal or generalised; 4 focused exclusively on focal SE, and 7 differentiated between convulsive and non-convulsive SE and also record the presence of focal seizures. Treatment recommendations for focal SE do not differ from those of generalised SE in stages I and II: initially intravenous lorazepam or diazepam, if the intravenous route is available, and otherwise intramuscular midazolam, followed by intravenous phenytoin, valproate, levetiracetam, or lacosamide if seizures persist. Use of anaesthetic drugs should be delayed for as long as possible in patients with refractory focal SE. CONCLUSIONS: The available scientific evidence is insufficient to claim that pharmacological treatment of focal SE should be different from treatment for generalised SE. More studies with a greater number of patients are needed.

Estatus epiléptico focal: revisión del tratamiento farmacológico / Focal status epilepticus: a review of pharmacological treatment

Introducción: El estatus epiléptico (EE) es una urgencia neurológica asociada a una elevada mortalidad y morbilidad. Uno de los factores pronósticos es el tipo de EE. El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar las últimas recomendaciones de las distintas sociedades científicas y grupos de expertos sobre el tratamiento del EE, así como los estudios más recientes, para evaluar las referencias sobre el manejo del EE de tipo focal.MétodosSe realizó una búsqueda en PubMed entre el 01/08/2008 y el 01/08/2018 sobre el tratamiento farmacológico del EE focal y sus distintos tipos en adultos.ResultadosSe encontraron 29 publicaciones entre revisiones, guías terapéuticas, metaanálisis, ensayos clínicos y estudios de casos sobre el tratamiento del EE. De estas, solamente 3 tienen en cuenta si el EE es focal o generalizado, 4 se centran exclusivamente en EE focales y 7 diferencian entre EE convulsivo o no convulsivo especificando si incluyen crisis focales. Las recomendaciones terapéuticas para un EE focal no difieren de las de un EE generalizado en las fases I y II: inicialmente lorazepam o diazepam intravenoso si hay acceso venoso o midazolam intramuscular en caso contrario, seguido de fenitoína, valproato, levetiracetam o lacosamida intravenosos si persisten las crisis. En EE focales refractarios se recomienda retrasar en lo posible el inicio de fármacos anestésicos.ConclusionesActualmente no disponemos de suficiente evidencia científica para afirmar que el tratamiento farmacológico del EE focal debe ser distinto al del EE generalizado. Son necesarios más registros con un amplio número de pacientes. (AU)

Introduction: Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency associated with high morbidity and mortality. One prognostic factor is the type of SE. The purpose of this review is to analyse the most recent recommendations of different scientific societies and expert groups on the treatment of SE, and the latest studies, to assess the literature on the management of focal SE.MethodsWe searched PubMed for studies published between 1 August 2008 and 1 August 2018 on the pharmacological treatment of focal SE and its different types in adults.ResultsWe identified 29 publications among reviews, treatment guidelines, meta-analyses, clinical trials, and case series on the treatment of SE. Only 3 of them accounted for whether SE was focal or generalised; 4 focused exclusively on focal SE, and 7 differentiated between convulsive and non-convulsive SE and also record the presence of focal seizures. Treatment recommendations for focal SE do not differ from those of generalised SE in stages I and II: initially intravenous lorazepam or diazepam, if the intravenous route is available, and otherwise intramuscular midazolam, followed by intravenous phenytoin, valproate, levetiracetam, or lacosamide if seizures persist. Use of anaesthetic drugs should be delayed for as long as possible in patients with refractory focal SE.ConclusionsThe available scientific evidence is insufficient to claim that pharmacological treatment of focal SE should be different from treatment for generalised SE. More studies with a greater number of patients are needed. (AU)

Manejo y factores de riesgo de mortalidad del estatus epiléptico: estudio retrospectivo / Status epilepticus management and mortality risk factors: A retrospective study

Introducción: El estatus epiléptico (SE, por sus siglas en inglés) es una urgencia neurológica con altas tasas de mortalidad. En este estudio analizamos el manejo del SE e identificamos factores de riesgo de mortalidad en los que realizar intervenciones de mejora o modificaciones en los protocolos de actuación hospitalarios. Métodos: Retrospectivamente se analizaron los datos demográficos de tratamiento y pronóstico de 65 pacientes (59 [44,5-77] años, 53,8% mujeres) que ingresaron en un hospital terciario cumpliendo los criterios de SE de la ILAE 2015, durante un periodo de 18 meses. Resultados: Treinta (46,2%) pacientes tenían antecedentes de epilepsia. Las causas más frecuentes de SE fueron enfermedad cerebrovascular (27,7%) e infección sistémica (16,9%). Se registraron desviaciones respecto al tratamiento habitual: la administración de las benzodiazepinas como primer fármaco solo en 33 (50,8%) pacientes, la combinación de 2 benzodiazepinas en 7 (10,8%) pacientes y el uso off-label de lacosamida en 5 (7,7%) pacientes. El electroencefalograma (EEG) fue realizado únicamente en 26 (40%) pacientes y solo 5 EEG (7,7% de pacientes) en las primeras 12 h. La tasa de mortalidad fue del 21,5%. Ictus agudo y complicaciones cerebrovasculares se asociaron con mortalidad, mientras que epilepsia previa e ingreso en la unidad de cuidados intensivos (UCI) fueron factores de buen pronóstico (p < 0,05). Conclusiones: Para mejorar el manejo del SE y reducir la tasa de mortalidad, sería recomendable implementar actividades formativas dirigidas a los profesionales del departamento de urgencias, así como el ingreso electivo en la UCI para pacientes con factores de riesgo (primera crisis epiléptica, con ictus agudo o complicaciones cardiovasculares). (AU)

Introduction: Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency with relatively high mortality rates. In this study, we analysed the management of SE and identified mortality risk factors that may be addressed with educational interventions or modifications to hospital protocols. Methods: In this retrospective study, we analysed demographic, treatment, and outcome data from 65 patients (mean age, 59 years [range, 44.5-77]; 53.8% women) who were admitted to our tertiary hospital during an 18-month period and met the 2015 International League Against Epilepsy criteria for SE. Results: Thirty patients (46.2%) had history of epilepsy. The most frequent causes of SE were cerebrovascular disease (27.7%) and systemic infection (16.9%). The following deviations were observed in the administration of the antiepileptic drugs: benzodiazepines were used as first option in only 33 (50.8%) patients; the combination of 2 benzodiazepines was recorded in 7 cases (10.8%); and lacosamide was used as an off-label drug in 5 patients (7.7%). Electroencephalography studies were performed in only 26 patients (40%); and only 5 studies (7.7% of patients) were performed within 12 hours of seizure onset. The mortality rate was 21.5%. Acute stroke and cerebrovascular complications were associated with higher mortality rates, while previous history of epilepsy and admission to intensive care were related to better prognosis (P <.05). Conclusions: To improve SE management and reduce mortality rates, training activities targeting emergency department physicians should be implemented, together with elective intensive care admission for patients with multiple mortality risk factors (eg, absence of history of epilepsy, acute stroke, or cardiovascular complications). (AU)

Características clínicas de pacientes con epilepsia atendidos en la atención primaria / Clinical characteristics of patients with epilepsy attending primary health care

Objetivo: Este estudio tuvo como objetivo llenar el vacío de conocimiento actual en la bibliografía mediante la identificación de las características demográficas y clínicas de los pacientes con epilepsia que asisten a la atención primaria de salud. Pacientes y métodos: Éste fue un estudio transversal que involucró a adultos (18 años o mayores) con epilepsia que asistieron a atención primaria de salud de un país en desarrollo entre 2015 y 2019. Se recopilaron información demográfica y datos relacionados con la epilepsia. Resultados: Se evaluó a un total de 140 pacientes –51,4%, varones; edad media (± desviación estándar), 44,9 ± 17,8 años–. La edad media de inicio de las crisis fue de 29,9 ± 22,9 años, con una evolución media de 14,3 ± 15,4 años. Las crisis focales presentes en el 88,57% de los casos y evolucionaron a crisis tonicoclónicas bilaterales (45,16%). De las generalizadas, las crisis motoras predominaron con el 81,82%; las ausencias, el 9,09%; y las motoras + ausencias, el 9,09%. Entre las crisis motoras de inicio generalizado, predominó la tonicoclónica, con un 55,56%. Entre los tipos, predominó la epilepsia focal (88,57%). Las etiologías primarias fueron desconocidas (62,14%), causas estructurales (27,85%) e infecciosas (9,28%). Los pacientes en monoterapia representaron el 66,1%, con control de la epilepsia en el 92,4%. Los fármacos antiepilépticos más utilizados fueron la carbamacepina (33,1%), el ácido valproico (28,2%) y el fenobarbital (10,4%). Conclusiones: Predominaron el sexo masculino, las convulsiones y la epilepsia focal. La resonancia magnética fue más útil que la tomografía computarizada. La mayoría de las etiologías se desconocían; sin embargo, la esclerosis temporal mesial y la neurocisticercosis fueron las causas conocidas más prevalentes. La mayoría de los pacientes se controlaron con un régimen de monoterapia. La implementación de las clasificaciones y definiciones de la Liga Internacional contra la Epilepsia fue factible y útil.(AU)

Objective: This study aimed to fill the current knowledge gap in the literature by identifying the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with epilepsy attending primary health care (PHC). Patients and methods: This was a cross-sectional study involving adults (≥ 18 years of age) with epilepsy attending PHC from a developing country between 2015 and 2019. Demographic information and epilepsy-related data were collected. Results: A total of 140 patients (51.4% male; mean [± SD] age 44.9 ± 17.8 years) were evaluated. The mean age at onset of seizures was 29.9 ± 22.9 years, with a mean evolution of 14.3±15.4 years. Focal seizures accounted for 88.57% of cases and evolved into bilateral tonic-clonic attack (45.16%). Of those that were generalized, motor seizures accounted for 81.82%, absence 9.09%, and motor + absence 9.09%. Among generalized onset motor seizures, tonic-clonic was predominant, accounting for 55.56%. Among types, focal epilepsy predominated (88.57%). The primary etiologies were unknown (62.14%), structural causes (27.85%) and infectious (9.28%). Patients undergoing monotherapy accounted for 66.1%, with epilepsy control in 92.4%. The most commonly used antiepileptic drugs were carbamazepine (33.1%), valproic acid (28.2%), and phenobarbital (10.4%). Conclusions: Male sex, seizures, and focal epilepsy were prevalent. Magnetic resonance imaging was more useful than computed tomography. Most etiologies were unknown; however, mesial temporal sclerosis and neurocysticercosis were the most prevalent known causes. Most patients were controlled using a monotherapy regimen. The implementation of International League Against Epilepsy classifications and definitions was feasible and useful.(AU)

Papel de la estimulación del nervio vago en el tratamiento de la epilepsia refractaria. Resultados clínicos e impacto en la calidad de vida / The role of vagus nerve stimulation in the treatment of refractory epilepsy: Clinical outcomes and impact on quality of life

Introducción: La estimulación del nervio vago (ENV) se ha mostrado como una terapia complementaria al tratamiento farmacológico en pacientes con epilepsia refractaria. Nuestro objetivo es evaluar la eficacia de la ENV en relación con la disminución del número, intensidad y duración de las crisis, con la reducción del número de fármacos antiepilépticos y con la mejoría de la calidad de vida. Material y métodos: Se analizó la evolución de 70 pacientes con epilepsia refractaria, tratados mediante ENV en el Hospital General Universitario de Alicante y en el Hospital Clínico de Valencia. Se recogieron variables pre- y postoperatorias. La diferencia en la frecuencia tras la estimulación vagal se clasificó mediante la escala de McHugh. También se recogieron los cambios en la duración e intensidad de las crisis y la disminución de la medicación junto con la modificación de la calidad de vida. Resultados: El 12,86% de los pacientes se clasificaron como McHugh I, el 44,29% como ii, el 40% como iii y el 2,86% como iv-v. Un 57,15% de los pacientes presentaron una reducción superior al 50% en la frecuencia de las crisis. Un 88% de los pacientes presentaron una mejoría en la duración de las crisis, en el 68% disminuyó la intensidad, un 66% toman menos fármacos y en el 93% mejoró la calidad de vida. Conclusiones: La ENV ha mostrado disminuir la frecuencia de las crisis, así como la duración, la intensidad y el consumo de fármacos, ofreciendo además una mejoría en la calidad de vida de nuestros pacientes. (AU)

Background: Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is used as a complementary therapy to pharmacological treatment in patients with refractory epilepsy. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of VNS in reducing seizure frequency, severity, and duration; reducing the number of antiepileptic drugs administered; and improving patients’ quality of life. Material and methods: We analysed the clinical progression of 70 patients with refractory epilepsy treated with VNS at Hospital Universitario de Alicante and Hospital Clínico de Valencia. Data were collected before and after the procedure. The difference in seizure frequency pre- and post-VNS was classified using the McHugh scale. Data were also collected on seizure duration and severity, the number of drugs administered, and quality of life. Results: According to the McHugh classification, 12.86% of the patients were Class I, 44.29% were Class II, 40% were Class III, and the remaining 2.86% of patients were Class IV-V. A ≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency was observed in 57.15% of patients. Improvements were observed in seizure duration in 88% of patients and in seizure severity in 68%; the number of drugs administered was reduced in 66% of patients, and 93% reported better quality of life. Conclusions: VNS is effective for reducing seizure frequency, duration, and severity and the number of antiepileptic drugs administered. It also enables an improvement in patients’ quality of life. (AU)

Depresión en pacientes con epilepsia. Experiencia en un hospital privado de Argentina / Depression in patients with epilepsy: experience in a private hospital in Argentina

Resumen Introducción: La depresión es el trastorno psiquiátrico más frecuente en pacientes con epilepsia, con una prevalencia estimada entre 35% y 60%, asociándose a un peor control de crisis epilép ticas. A pesar de la gran prevalencia de depresión, muchos pacientes no son diagnosticados, presentando una peor evolución clínica y calidad de vida. No existen estudios de prevalencia en nuestro medio. El objeti vo fue determinar la prevalencia de depresión en epilepsia y su relación con el control de crisis. Materiales y métodos: Es un estudio prospectivo, descriptivo y transversal de una cohorte de pacientes a los cuales se les realizó el Inventario de Depresión en Pacientes con Trastornos Neurológicos para Epilepsia (NDDI-E) y se analizaron datos de las historias clínicas. Resultados: Se incluyeron 121 pacientes, la prevalencia de depresión fue 43% (n:52), el 77% eran mujeres (p = 0.01). Del total de pacientes con depresión, el 63% fue diagnosticado en este estudio. La mayoría tuvo buen control de la crisis (70%) y no presentó depresión, mientras que la mayoría con mal (57%) y regular (63%) control de la crisis presentó depresión (p < 0.001). Discusión: La comorbilidad entre depresión y epilepsia es altamente prevalente, influyendo negativamen te en el control de las crisis epilépticas. La mayoría de los pacientes se encuentran subdiagnosticados. El tamizaje de la depresión mayor en aquellos con epilepsia es necesario, contribuyendo a la mejoría clínica.

Abstract Introduction: Depression is the most frequent psychiatric disorder in patients with epilepsy, with an estimated prevalence between 35% and 60%, associated with poorer control of epileptic seizures. Despite the high prevalence of depression, many patients are not diagnosed, presenting a worse clinical course and quality of life. There are no prevalence studies in our population. The main objective was to determinate the prevalence of depression in epilepsy and its relationship with seizure control. Materials and methods: It is a prospective, descriptive and cross-sectional study of a cohort of patients who underwent the Depression Inventory in Pa tients with Neurological Disorders for Epilepsy (NDDI-E) and the data from the medical records were analyzed. Results: A total of 121 patients were inluded, and the prevalence of depression was 43% (n:52), of whom 77% were women (p = 0.01). A 63% of patients with depression was diagnosed in this study. Most of them with good seizure control (70%) did not present depression, while the majority of those with poor (57%) and regular (63%) seizure control presented depression (p < 0.001). Discussion: Comorbidity between depression and epilepsy is highly prevalent, negatively influencing the control of epileptic seizures. Most patients are underdiagnosed. Screening for major depression in patients with epilepsy is necessary, contributing to the clinical improvement.

Status epilepticus management and mortality risk factors: a retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency with relatively high mortality rates. In this study, we analysed the management of SE and identified mortality risk factors that may be addressed with educational interventions or modifications to hospital protocols. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we analysed demographic, treatment, and outcome data from 65 patients (mean age, 59 years [range, 44.5-77]; 53.8% women) who were admitted to our tertiary hospital during an 18-month period and met the 2015 International League Against Epilepsy criteria for SE. RESULTS: Thirty patients (46.2%) had history of epilepsy. The most frequent causes of SE were cerebrovascular disease (27.7%) and systemic infection (16.9%). The following deviations were observed in the administration of the antiepileptic drugs: benzodiazepines were used as first option in only 33 (50.8%) patients; the combination of 2 benzodiazepines was recorded in 7 cases (10.8%); and lacosamide was used as an off-label drug in 5 patients (7.7%). Electroencephalography studies were performed in only 26 patients (40%); and only 5 studies (7.7% of patients) were performed within 12 hours of seizure onset. The mortality rate was 21.5%. Acute stroke and cerebrovascular complications were associated with higher mortality rates, while previous history of epilepsy and admission to intensive care were related to better prognosis (P <  .05). CONCLUSIONS: To improve SE management and reduce mortality rates, training activities targeting emergency department physicians should be implemented, together with elective intensive care admission for patients with multiple mortality risk factors (eg, absence of history of epilepsy, acute stroke, or cardiovascular complications).

The role of vagus nerve stimulation in the treatment of refractory epilepsy: clinical outcomes and impact on quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is used as a complementary therapy to pharmacological treatment in patients with refractory epilepsy. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of VNS in reducing seizure frequency, severity, and duration; reducing the number of antiepileptic drugs administered; and improving patients' quality of life. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analysed the clinical progression of 70 patients with refractory epilepsy treated with VNS at Hospital Universitario de Alicante and Hospital Clínico de Valencia. Data were collected before and after the procedure. The difference in seizure frequency pre- and post-VNS was classified using the McHugh scale. Data were also collected on seizure duration and severity, the number of drugs administered, and quality of life. RESULTS: According to the McHugh classification, 12.86% of the patients were Class I, 44.29% were Class II, 40% were Class III, and the remaining 2.86% of patients were Class IV-V. A ≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency was observed in 57.15% of patients. Improvements were observed in seizure duration in 88% of patients and in seizure severity in 68%; the number of drugs administered was reduced in 66% of patients, and 93% reported better quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: VNS is effective for reducing seizure frequency, duration, and severity and the number of antiepileptic drugs administered. It also enables an improvement in patients' quality of life.

Atención en el servicio de urgencias de las crisis epilépticas en pacientes con epilepsia / Emergency department management of epileptic seizures in patients with epilepsy

Objetivo: Analizar la atención al paciente con epilepsia (PcE) que consulta en el servicio de urgencias hospitalarias (SUH) por una crisis epiléptica. Materiales y métodos: Estudio observacional retrospectivo unicéntrico, basado en la historia clínica de los PcE atendidos en el SUH por crisis epilépticas entre enero de 2016 y diciembre de 2018. Se recogieron variables demográficas, clínicas y de manejo en el SUH. De forma específica, se analizó la realización de una tomografía computarizada cerebral y un electroencefalograma, y la presencia de factores precipitantes de crisis epilépticas. Resultados: Se identificó a 232 PcE, con una edad media de 49,8 años. El motivo de atención más frecuente fueron las crisis epilépticas focales (50,4%). En 106 (45,6%) se encontraron posibles factores precipitantes, de entre los cuales, la mala adhesión terapéutica fue el más frecuente. En 67 casos (28,9%) se realizó una tomografía computarizada cerebral urgente, y se encontraron alteraciones agudas en un solo paciente. En 16 (6,9%) se realizó un electroencefalograma. Se realizó un ajuste del tratamiento antiepiléptico en 135 pacientes (58,1%). Fueron dados de alta sin hospitalización 195 (84,1%). Conclusiones: Los PcE representaron una proporción considerable de pacientes atendidos por crisis epilépticas en el SUH. Casi en la mitad de los casos se identificó la presencia de algún factor precipitante potencialmente controlable, y el más frecuente fue la mala adhesión terapéutica. Además, se observó una realización de pruebas complementarias urgentes elevada, que en muchos casos podrían ser prescindibles.(AU)

Aim: To analyse the care of patients with epilepsy (PwE) who visit the hospital emergency department (ED) due to an epileptic seizure. Materials and methods: Single-centre retrospective observational study, based on the clinical history of the PwE seen in the ED for epileptic seizures between January 2016 and December 2018. Demographic, clinical and ED management variables were collected. Specifically, the results of a computed tomography (CT) brain scan and electroencephalogram and the presence of precipitating factors for epileptic seizures were analysed. Results: A total of 232 PwE were identified, with a mean age of 49.8 years. The most frequent reason for the visit was focal epileptic seizures (50.4%). In 106 cases (45.6%) possible precipitating factors were found, of which poor therapy adherence was the most frequent. An urgent CT brain scan was performed in 67 cases (28.9%) and acute alterations were found in only one patient. An electroencephalogram was carried out in 16 of them (6.9%). Adjustments were made to the antiepileptic treatment in 135 patients (58.1%). A total of 195 were discharged without being hospitalised (84.1%). Conclusions: PwE accounted for a considerable proportion of the patients seen for epileptic seizures in the ED. The presence of a potentially controllable precipitating factor was identified in almost half of the cases, the most frequent being poor adherence to therapy. In addition, a high number of urgent complementary tests were performed, which in many cases may be unnecessary and avoidable.(AU)

Implications of initiating antiseizure drugs prior to the performance of EEG in first epileptic seizures. / Implicaciones de iniciar fármacos antiepilépticos previo a la realización de EEG en primeras crisis epilépticas.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to determine whether the administration of antiepileptic drugs (AED) alters the likelihood of detecting epileptiform abnormalities in electroencephalographies (EEG) performed early after a first epileptic seizure. METHOD: We performed a retrospective, observational study including patients with a first seizure attended at our centre's emergency department between July 2014 and November 2019. We collected clinical data, as well as technical data on the acquisition and interpretation of the EEG performed within the first 72hours after the seizure, and the factors related with seizure recurrence. RESULTS: We recruited 155 patients with a mean (SD) age of 48.6 (22.5) years; 61.3% were men. Regarding seizure type, 51% presented tonic-clonic seizures of unknown onset and 12% presented focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures. Thirty-nine patients (25.2%) received AED treatment before the EEG was performed: 33 received a non-benzodiazepine AED and 6 received a benzodiazepine. Epileptiform abnormalities were observed in 29.7% of patients. Previous administration of AEDs was not significantly associated with the probability of detecting interictal epileptiform abnormalities (P=.25) or with the risk of recurrence within 6 months (P=.63). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of AEDs before an early EEG following a first seizure does not decrease the likelihood of detecting epileptiform abnormalities. These findings suggest that starting AED treatment immediately in patients with a high risk of early recurrence does not imply a reduction in the diagnostic accuracy of the test.

Observational multicentre study into the use of antiepileptic drugs in Spanish neurology consultations. / Estudio observacional multicéntrico español sobre el empleo de fármacos antiepilépticos en consultas de neurología.

INTRODUCTION: The study aims to quantify the types of antiepileptic drugs (AED) prescribed in neurology consultations. MATERIAL AND METHOD: This descriptive, observational study included a sample of 559 patients older than 14 years, diagnosed with epilepsy, and receiving pharmacological treatment. Data were collected at outpatient consultations by 47 Spanish neurologists in May 2016. Epilepsy was defined based on the International League Against Epilepsy classification. According to the year of marketing, AEDs were categorised as classic (before 1990) or new (after 1990). We performed a descriptive analysis of qualitative and quantitative variables. RESULTS: Female patients accounted for 54.6% of the sample. Mean age was 42.7 years; mean age of onset was 22.4. Regarding epilepsy type, 75.7% of patients experienced partial seizures, 51.5% were symptomatic,32.4% had refractory epilepsy, 35.6% had been seizure-free for the previous year, and 59.2% had associated comorbidities.A total of 1103 AED prescriptions were made; 64.6% of prescriptions were for new AEDs; 85.4% of patients received new AEDs. Patients received a mean of 2 AEDs (range, 1-5). A total of 59.6% of patients received polytherapy.The most frequently prescribed AEDs were levetiracetam (42.6%), valproic acid (25.4%), lamotrigine (19.5%), carbamazepine (17.9%), and lacosamide (17.5%). No AED was employed exclusively as monotherapy. The most frequently prescribed AEDs for generalised and partial seizures were valproic acid (48.2%) and levetiracetam (43.2%), respectively. Valproic acid was less frequently prescribed to female patients. Patients with refractory epilepsy or with associated comorbidities were more frequently prescribed a combination of new and classic AEDs (48.7% and 45.6%, respectively) than only one type of AED. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients received new AEDs. The combination of classic and new AEDs was more frequently prescribed to patients with refractory epilepsy or with associated comorbidities.

Status epilepticus management and mortality risk factors: A retrospective study. / Manejo y factores de riesgo de mortalidad del estatus epiléptico: estudio retrospectivo.

INTRODUCTION: Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency with relatively high mortality rates. In this study, we analysed the management of SE and identified mortality risk factors that may be addressed with educational interventions or modifications to hospital protocols. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we analysed demographic, treatment, and outcome data from 65 patients (mean age, 59 years [range, 44.5-77]; 53.8% women) who were admitted to our tertiary hospital during an 18-month period and met the 2015 International League Against Epilepsy criteria for SE. RESULTS: Thirty patients (46.2%) had history of epilepsy. The most frequent causes of SE were cerebrovascular disease (27.7%) and systemic infection (16.9%). The following deviations were observed in the administration of the antiepileptic drugs: benzodiazepines were used as first option in only 33 (50.8%) patients; the combination of 2 benzodiazepines was recorded in 7 cases (10.8%); and lacosamide was used as an off-label drug in 5 patients (7.7%). Electroencephalography studies were performed in only 26 patients (40%); and only 5 studies (7.7% of patients) were performed within 12 hours of seizure onset. The mortality rate was 21.5%. Acute stroke and cerebrovascular complications were associated with higher mortality rates, while previous history of epilepsy and admission to intensive care were related to better prognosis (P <.05). CONCLUSIONS: To improve SE management and reduce mortality rates, training activities targeting emergency department physicians should be implemented, together with elective intensive care admission for patients with multiple mortality risk factors (eg, absence of history of epilepsy, acute stroke, or cardiovascular complications).

Vinpocetina de liberación prolongada: un posible tratamiento adyuvante en crisis epiléptica de inicio focal / Extended-release vinpocetine: a possible adjuvant treatment for focal onset epileptic seizures

Resumen Introducción: La vinpocetina de liberación prolongada ha demostrado ser efectiva en el control de crisis de inicio focal en pacientes epilépticos con una baja frecuencia de eventos adversos. Se realizó un estudio clínico para evaluar la eficacia y tolerabilidad de la vinpocetina como tratamiento adyuvante en pacientes con este padecimiento. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio clínico, doble ciego, de grupos paralelos. Se reclutaron 87 pacientes con diagnóstico de epilepsia focal tratados con uno a tres fármacos antiepilépticos. Los pacientes se aleatorizaron para ser tratados con vinpocetina (n = 41) o placebo (n = 46) de manera adyuvante a su tratamiento, e ingresaron a la fase basal (4 semanas), a la fase de titulación (4 semanas) y a la fase de evaluación (8 semanas) conservando estables las dosis de la vinpocetina y de los fármacos antiepilépticos. Resultados: La vinpocetina fue más efectiva que el placebo en la reducción de las crisis al finalizar la fase de evaluación (p < 0.0001). El 69% de los pacientes tratados con vinpocetina presentaron una reducción mayor al 50% en las crisis en comparación con el 13% de los pacientes tratados con placebo. No se presentaron diferencias significativas en cuanto a la presencia de efectos adversos en los pacientes tratados con vinpocetina comparados con los tratados con placebo. Los eventos adversos más frecuentes observados con vinpocetina fueron cefalea (7.9%) y diplopía (5.2%). Conclusiones: Como tratamiento adyuvante, la vinpocetina (2 mg/kg/día) redujo eficazmente la frecuencia de crisis epilépticas y demostró ser bien tolerada. Presenta un amplio perfil de seguridad y eventos adversos conocidos, que son transitorios y sin secuelas.

Abstract Background: Extended-release vinpocetine is effective to control focal onset epileptic seizures with a low rate of adverse events. A clinical study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of vinpocetine as an adjuvant treatment in patients with this condition. Methods: A double-blind clinical study of parallel groups was conducted, in which 87 patients with a diagnosis of focal epilepsy treated with one to three antiepileptic drugs were recruited. Patients were randomized to receive vinpocetine (n = 41) or placebo (n = 46) adjuvant to their treatment. Patients entered the baseline phase (4 weeks), the titration phase (4 weeks) and the evaluation phase (8 weeks), maintaining stable doses of vinpocetine and their respective antiepileptic drug treatment. Results: Vinpocetine was more effective than placebo in reducing seizures at the end of the evaluation phase (p < 0.0001). Sixty-nine percent of the vinpocetine-treated patients had a 50% reduction in seizures compared to 13% of placebo-treated patients. No significant differences in the presence of adverse effects in patients treated with vinpocetine compared to those treated with placebo were observed. The most frequent adverse events observed with vinpocetine were headache (7.9%) and diplopia (5.2%). Conclusions: As an adjuvant treatment, vinpocetine (2 mg/kg/day) effectively reduced the frequency of epileptic seizures and proved to be well tolerated. Vinpocetine has a wide safety profile and well-known adverse events, which are transient and with no sequelae.

Extended-release vinpocetine: a possible adjuvant treatment for focal onset epileptic seizures.

Background: Extended-release vinpocetine is effective to control focal onset epileptic seizures with a low rate of adverse events. A clinical study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of vinpocetine as an adjuvant treatment in patients with this condition. Methods: A double-blind clinical study of parallel groups was conducted, in which 87 patients with a diagnosis of focal epilepsy treated with one to three antiepileptic drugs were recruited. Patients were randomized to receive vinpocetine (n = 41) or placebo (n = 46) adjuvant to their treatment. Patients entered the baseline phase (4 weeks), the titration phase (4 weeks) and the evaluation phase (8 weeks), maintaining stable doses of vinpocetine and their respective antiepileptic drug treatment. Results: Vinpocetine was more effective than placebo in reducing seizures at the end of the evaluation phase (p < 0.0001). Sixty-nine percent of the vinpocetine-treated patients had a 50% reduction in seizures compared to 13% of placebo-treated patients. No significant differences in the presence of adverse effects in patients treated with vinpocetine compared to those treated with placebo were observed. The most frequent adverse events observed with vinpocetine were headache (7.9%) and diplopia (5.2%). Conclusions: As an adjuvant treatment, vinpocetine (2 mg/kg/day) effectively reduced the frequency of epileptic seizures and proved to be well tolerated. Vinpocetine has a wide safety profile and well-known adverse events, which are transient and with no sequelae.

Introducción: La vinpocetina de liberación prolongada ha demostrado ser efectiva en el control de crisis de inicio focal en pacientes epilépticos con una baja frecuencia de eventos adversos. Se realizó un estudio clínico para evaluar la eficacia y tolerabilidad de la vinpocetina como tratamiento adyuvante en pacientes con este padecimiento. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio clínico, doble ciego, de grupos paralelos. Se reclutaron 87 pacientes con diagnóstico de epilepsia focal tratados con uno a tres fármacos antiepilépticos. Los pacientes se aleatorizaron para ser tratados con vinpocetina (n = 41) o placebo (n = 46) de manera adyuvante a su tratamiento, e ingresaron a la fase basal (4 semanas), a la fase de titulación (4 semanas) y a la fase de evaluación (8 semanas) conservando estables las dosis de la vinpocetina y de los fármacos antiepilépticos. Resultados: La vinpocetina fue más efectiva que el placebo en la reducción de las crisis al finalizar la fase de evaluación (p < 0.0001). El 69% de los pacientes tratados con vinpocetina presentaron una reducción mayor al 50% en las crisis en comparación con el 13% de los pacientes tratados con placebo. No se presentaron diferencias significativas en cuanto a la presencia de efectos adversos en los pacientes tratados con vinpocetina comparados con los tratados con placebo. Los eventos adversos más frecuentes observados con vinpocetina fueron cefalea (7.9%) y diplopía (5.2%). Conclusiones: Como tratamiento adyuvante, la vinpocetina (2 mg/kg/día) redujo eficazmente la frecuencia de crisis epilépticas y demostró ser bien tolerada. Presenta un amplio perfil de seguridad y eventos adversos conocidos, que son transitorios y sin secuelas.

Nuevos fármacos antiepilépticos / New antiepileptic drugs

Los fármacos antiepilépticos constituyen el tratamiento inicial en pacientes con epilepsia. Los antIepilépticos producidos después del año 2000 se conocen como fármacos de tercera generación. Estas drogas ofrecen nuevos mecanismos de acción y una farmacocinética más favorable, minimizando efectos adversos o interacciones medicamentosas. Las drogas de amplio espectro como brivaracetam y clobazam son una buena opción en casos de crisis generalizadas y poseen un grado de tolerabilidad muy aceptable. Los nuevos antiepilépticos bloqueadores de canales de sodio, como lacosamida y eslicarbazepina tienen un perfil de efectos adversos más favorable que los bloqueadores de sodio de primera o segunda generación. Estos nuevos medicamentos pueden utilizarse en pacientes con epilepsia de difícil control. Cannabidiol y fenfluramina son muy útiles en el tratamiento del síndrome de Dravet o Lennox Gastaut. La Alopregnenolona y ganaxolona demuestran buena eficacia en casos de estado epiléptico y podrían en el futuro cercano tener un papel importante en este escenario clínico.

Antiepileptic drugs are the first treatment option in patients with epilepsy. Drugs developed after 2000 are known as third generation antiepileptic drugs. These medications offer new mechanisms of action and favorable pharmacokinetics, decreasing the occurrence of side effects and drug-drug interactions. Broad spectrum antiepileptic drugs, such as brivaracetam and clobazam are good choices for generalized tonic colonic seizures and are well tolerated.New sodium channel blockers such as lacosamide and eslicarbazepine, have a more "benign" side effect profile than the first or second generation of sodium channel blockers. These new drugs are useful therapies in patients with epilepsy of difficult control. Cannabidiol and fenfluramine are useful in the treatment of Dravet or Lennox Gastaut syndrome. Allopregnenolona and ganaxolone showed good efficacy in status epilepticus and could play an important future role in this clinical scenario.

The role of vagus nerve stimulation in the treatment of refractory epilepsy: Clinical outcomes and impact on quality of life. / Papel de la estimulación del nervio vago en el tratamiento de la epilepsia refractaria. Resultados clínicos e impacto en la calidad de vida.

BACKGROUND: Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is used as a complementary therapy to pharmacological treatment in patients with refractory epilepsy. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of VNS in reducing seizure frequency, severity, and duration; reducing the number of antiepileptic drugs administered; and improving patients' quality of life. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analysed the clinical progression of 70 patients with refractory epilepsy treated with VNS at Hospital Universitario de Alicante and Hospital Clínico de Valencia. Data were collected before and after the procedure. The difference in seizure frequency pre- and post-VNS was classified using the McHugh scale. Data were also collected on seizure duration and severity, the number of drugs administered, and quality of life. RESULTS: According to the McHugh classification, 12.86% of the patients were Class I, 44.29% were Class II, 40% were Class III, and the remaining 2.86% of patients were Class IV-V. A≥50% reduction in seizure frequency was observed in 57.15% of patients. Improvements were observed in seizure duration in 88% of patients and in seizure severity in 68%; the number of drugs administered was reduced in 66% of patients, and 93% reported better quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: VNS is effective for reducing seizure frequency, duration, and severity and the number of antiepileptic drugs administered. It also enables an improvement in patients' quality of life.

Focal status epilepticus: a review of pharmacological treatment. / Estatus epiléptico focal: revisión del tratamiento farmacológico.

INTRODUCTION: Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency associated with high morbidity and mortality. One prognostic factor is the type of SE. The purpose of this review is to analyse the most recent recommendations of different scientific societies and expert groups on the treatment of SE, and the latest studies, to assess the literature on the management of focal SE. METHODS: We searched PubMed for studies published between 1 August 2008 and 1 August 2018 on the pharmacological treatment of focal SE and its different types in adults. RESULTS: We identified 29 publications among reviews, treatment guidelines, meta-analyses, clinical trials, and case series on the treatment of SE. Only 3 of them accounted for whether SE was focal or generalised; 4 focused exclusively on focal SE, and 7 differentiated between convulsive and non-convulsive SE and also record the presence of focal seizures. Treatment recommendations for focal SE do not differ from those of generalised SE in stages I and II: initially intravenous lorazepam or diazepam, if the intravenous route is available, and otherwise intramuscular midazolam, followed by intravenous phenytoin, valproate, levetiracetam, or lacosamide if seizures persist. Use of anaesthetic drugs should be delayed for as long as possible in patients with refractory focal SE. CONCLUSIONS: The available scientific evidence is insufficient to claim that pharmacological treatment of focal SE should be different from treatment for generalised SE. More studies with a greater number of patients are needed.