Usha K Misra1, Deepanshu Dubey1, Jayantee Kalita2. 1. Department of Neurology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow 226014, India. 2. Department of Neurology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow 226014, India. Electronic address: jkalita@sgpgi.ac.in.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of lacosamide (LCM) and sodium valproate (SVA) in lorazepam (LOR)-resistant SE. METHODS:Patients with LOR-resistant SE were randomized to intravenous LCM 400mg at the rate of 60mg/kg/min or SVA 30mg/kg at the rate of 100mg/min. The SE severity score (STESS), duration of SE and its etiology, and MRI findings were noted. Primary outcome was seizure cessation for 1h, and secondary outcomes were 24h seizure remission, in-hospital death, and severe adverse events (SAE). RESULTS:Sixty-six patients were included, and their median age was 40 (range 18-90) years. Thirty-three patients each received LCM and SVA. Their demographic, clinical, STESS, etiology, and MRI findings were not significantly different. One-hour seizure remission was not significantly different between LCM and SVA groups (66.7% vs 69.7%; P=0.79). Twenty-four-hour seizure freedom was insignificantly higher in SVA (20, 66.6%) compared with LCM group (15, 45.5%). Death (10 vs 12) and composite side effects (4 vs 6) were also not significantly different in LCM and SVA groups. LCM was associated with hypotension and bradycardia (1 patient), and SVA with liver dysfunction (6). CONCLUSION: In patients with LOR-resistant SE, both LCM and SVA have comparable efficacy and safety.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of lacosamide (LCM) and sodium valproate (SVA) in lorazepam (LOR)-resistant SE. METHODS:Patients with LOR-resistant SE were randomized to intravenous LCM 400mg at the rate of 60mg/kg/min or SVA 30mg/kg at the rate of 100mg/min. The SE severity score (STESS), duration of SE and its etiology, and MRI findings were noted. Primary outcome was seizure cessation for 1h, and secondary outcomes were 24h seizure remission, in-hospital death, and severe adverse events (SAE). RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were included, and their median age was 40 (range 18-90) years. Thirty-three patients each received LCM and SVA. Their demographic, clinical, STESS, etiology, and MRI findings were not significantly different. One-hour seizure remission was not significantly different between LCM and SVA groups (66.7% vs 69.7%; P=0.79). Twenty-four-hour seizure freedom was insignificantly higher in SVA (20, 66.6%) compared with LCM group (15, 45.5%). Death (10 vs 12) and composite side effects (4 vs 6) were also not significantly different in LCM and SVA groups. LCM was associated with hypotension and bradycardia (1 patient), and SVA with liver dysfunction (6). CONCLUSION: In patients with LOR-resistant SE, both LCM and SVA have comparable efficacy and safety.
Authors: K Erin Davidson; Joshua Newell; Khalid Alsherbini; Joseph Krushinski; G Morgan Jones Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: David G Vossler; Jacquelyn L Bainbridge; Jane G Boggs; Edward J Novotny; Tobias Loddenkemper; Edward Faught; Marta Amengual-Gual; Sarah N Fischer; David S Gloss; Donald M Olson; Alan R Towne; Dean Naritoku; Timothy E Welty Journal: Epilepsy Curr Date: 2020-08-21 Impact factor: 7.500
Authors: Ju Young Kim; Jin Hyeon Kim; Hee Jin Lee; Sang Hoon Kim; Young Jin Jung; Hee-Young Lee; Hee Jaung Kim; Sae Yoon Kim Journal: Yeungnam Univ J Med Date: 2018-12-31