INTRODUCTION: The purpose was to evaluate the effects of levetiracetam (LEV) in routine therapy in learning disabled patients with therapy-resistant epilepsy. METHODS: In an open observational add-on study design, 46 patients (residents of the Bethel Epilepsy Centre) with severe therapy-resistant epilepsy and different degrees of learning disabilities, who were treated with LEV between its introduction in Autumn 2000 and February 2002, were evaluated retrospectively. Information on monthly seizure frequencies, seizure severity and psychiatric status was extracted from the current patient case records. A 3 months baseline and a 3 months LEV treatment period (after 3 months of titration) were compared. Responders were defined as having a 50% reduction in seizure frequency and being evaluated as good or very good in an ad hoc global clinical efficacy scale. When only one criterion was positive, a careful individual decision was made based on the impact on the patients' daily activities. RESULTS: The responder rate was 41.3% (34.8 for 50% seizure reduction). It was higher in focal and multifocal epilepsy as compared to symptomatic generalised epilepsy/Lennox Gastaut Syndrome (P<0.05). Antiepileptic response occurred in doses between 500 and 4000 mg/day. Changes in seizure severity were rare. Nine patients experienced positive psychotropic effects (mostly improved vigilance and mood); six of these patients had antiepileptic effects as well. Twelve patients had adverse effects, mostly mild; in three cases, however, more severe effects led to discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: LEV is an effective and generally well-tolerated drug for this patient group, especially in focal and multifocal epilepsy.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose was to evaluate the effects of levetiracetam (LEV) in routine therapy in learning disabled patients with therapy-resistant epilepsy. METHODS: In an open observational add-on study design, 46 patients (residents of the Bethel Epilepsy Centre) with severe therapy-resistant epilepsy and different degrees of learning disabilities, who were treated with LEV between its introduction in Autumn 2000 and February 2002, were evaluated retrospectively. Information on monthly seizure frequencies, seizure severity and psychiatric status was extracted from the current patient case records. A 3 months baseline and a 3 months LEV treatment period (after 3 months of titration) were compared. Responders were defined as having a 50% reduction in seizure frequency and being evaluated as good or very good in an ad hoc global clinical efficacy scale. When only one criterion was positive, a careful individual decision was made based on the impact on the patients' daily activities. RESULTS: The responder rate was 41.3% (34.8 for 50% seizure reduction). It was higher in focal and multifocal epilepsy as compared to symptomatic generalised epilepsy/Lennox Gastaut Syndrome (P<0.05). Antiepileptic response occurred in doses between 500 and 4000 mg/day. Changes in seizure severity were rare. Nine patients experienced positive psychotropic effects (mostly improved vigilance and mood); six of these patients had antiepileptic effects as well. Twelve patients had adverse effects, mostly mild; in three cases, however, more severe effects led to discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS:LEV is an effective and generally well-tolerated drug for this patient group, especially in focal and multifocal epilepsy.