Perampanel as an Add-On Therapy in Patients with Refractory Status Epilepticus and Postanoxic Encephalopathy: A Real-Life Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neurocritical Care Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-13 DOI:10.1007/s12028-024-02019-w
Gianni Cutillo, Raffaello Bonacchi, Marco Vabanesi, Giordano Cecchetti, Anna Bellini, Massimo Filippi, Giovanna F Fanelli
{"title":"Perampanel as an Add-On Therapy in Patients with Refractory Status Epilepticus and Postanoxic Encephalopathy: A Real-Life Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Gianni Cutillo, Raffaello Bonacchi, Marco Vabanesi, Giordano Cecchetti, Anna Bellini, Massimo Filippi, Giovanna F Fanelli","doi":"10.1007/s12028-024-02019-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Data on the efficacy of perampanel in refractory status epilepticus (RSE) and postanoxic encephalopathy (PAE) are limited; its use in such conditions is currently off-label.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients with RSE, including PAE, exhibiting electroencephalographic patterns indicative of status epilepticus who were treated at our center (January 2018 to December 2022) with assessment of clinical and electroencephalographic outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-six patients were included in the study, of whom 29 had nonanoxic RSE and 7 had PAE. Within the nonanoxic RSE subgroup, 45% (13 of 29; 95% confidence interval [CI] 27-63%) of study participants were responders, 34% (10 of 29; 95% CI 17-52%) were partial responders, and 21% (6 of 29; 95% CI 6-35%) were nonresponders. In the PAE subgroup (n = 7), no patients fully responded to perampanel; 43% (3 of 7; 95% CI 6-80%) were partial responders, and 57% (4 of 7; 95% CI 20-95%) were nonresponders. Responder and nonresponder study participants exhibited overlapping baseline characteristics. No significant differences in duration of hospitalization were observed between responders and nonresponders in both subgroups. Responders in the RSE subgroup had a median discharge modified Rankin Scale score of 3 (interquartile range 3-4), and nonresponders had a median discharge modified Rankin Scale score of 5 (interquartile range 5-6).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite limitations from the retrospective design and the small population size, this study suggests that perampanel use in nonanoxic RSE appears to yield promising results at moderate doses, including a tendency toward a better functional outcome at discharge, without significant adverse effects. However, in patients with PAE, the drug seems to show suboptimal performance. Perampanel appears to have promising efficacy as an add-on therapy in nonanoxic RSE. However, in patients with PAE, its efficacy seems to be lower. Further studies are warranted to confirm these observations.</p>","PeriodicalId":19118,"journal":{"name":"Neurocritical Care","volume":" ","pages":"942-949"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurocritical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-024-02019-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Data on the efficacy of perampanel in refractory status epilepticus (RSE) and postanoxic encephalopathy (PAE) are limited; its use in such conditions is currently off-label.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients with RSE, including PAE, exhibiting electroencephalographic patterns indicative of status epilepticus who were treated at our center (January 2018 to December 2022) with assessment of clinical and electroencephalographic outcomes.

Results: Thirty-six patients were included in the study, of whom 29 had nonanoxic RSE and 7 had PAE. Within the nonanoxic RSE subgroup, 45% (13 of 29; 95% confidence interval [CI] 27-63%) of study participants were responders, 34% (10 of 29; 95% CI 17-52%) were partial responders, and 21% (6 of 29; 95% CI 6-35%) were nonresponders. In the PAE subgroup (n = 7), no patients fully responded to perampanel; 43% (3 of 7; 95% CI 6-80%) were partial responders, and 57% (4 of 7; 95% CI 20-95%) were nonresponders. Responder and nonresponder study participants exhibited overlapping baseline characteristics. No significant differences in duration of hospitalization were observed between responders and nonresponders in both subgroups. Responders in the RSE subgroup had a median discharge modified Rankin Scale score of 3 (interquartile range 3-4), and nonresponders had a median discharge modified Rankin Scale score of 5 (interquartile range 5-6).

Conclusions: Despite limitations from the retrospective design and the small population size, this study suggests that perampanel use in nonanoxic RSE appears to yield promising results at moderate doses, including a tendency toward a better functional outcome at discharge, without significant adverse effects. However, in patients with PAE, the drug seems to show suboptimal performance. Perampanel appears to have promising efficacy as an add-on therapy in nonanoxic RSE. However, in patients with PAE, its efficacy seems to be lower. Further studies are warranted to confirm these observations.

佩兰帕奈作为难治性癫痫状态和缺氧后脑病患者的附加疗法:一项现实生活中的单中心回顾性队列研究。
背景:有关培南帕尼对难治性癫痫状态(RSE)和缺氧后脑病(PAE)疗效的数据有限;目前,培南帕尼在此类病症中的使用属于非标签使用:我们对在本中心接受治疗(2018年1月至2022年12月)的连续RSE(包括PAE)成人患者进行了一项回顾性队列研究,并对临床和脑电图结果进行了评估:研究共纳入36例患者,其中29例为非缺氧性RSE,7例为PAE。在非缺氧性 RSE 亚组中,45%(29 人中有 13 人;95% 置信区间 [CI] 27-63%)的研究参与者有反应,34%(29 人中有 10 人;95% CI 17-52%)的研究参与者有部分反应,21%(29 人中有 6 人;95% CI 6-35%)的研究参与者无反应。在 PAE 亚组(n = 7)中,没有患者对 perampanel 完全应答;43%(7 例中的 3 例;95% CI 6-80%)为部分应答者,57%(7 例中的 4 例;95% CI 20-95%)为无应答者。应答者和非应答者的基线特征相互重叠。在两个亚组中,应答者和非应答者的住院时间没有明显差异。RSE亚组的应答者出院时改良Rankin量表评分的中位数为3分(四分位间范围为3-4分),非应答者出院时改良Rankin量表评分的中位数为5分(四分位间范围为5-6分):尽管存在回顾性设计和人群规模小的局限性,但本研究表明,在中等剂量下,对非缺氧性 RSE 使用 perampanel 似乎会产生良好的效果,包括出院时功能预后趋于改善,且无明显不良反应。然而,在 PAE 患者中,该药物似乎表现不佳。佩兰帕奈作为非缺氧性 RSE 的附加疗法似乎具有良好的疗效。但在 PAE 患者中,其疗效似乎较低。需要进一步研究来证实这些观察结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurocritical Care
Neurocritical Care 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
8.60%
发文量
221
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurocritical Care is a peer reviewed scientific publication whose major goal is to disseminate new knowledge on all aspects of acute neurological care. It is directed towards neurosurgeons, neuro-intensivists, neurologists, anesthesiologists, emergency physicians, and critical care nurses treating patients with urgent neurologic disorders. These are conditions that may potentially evolve rapidly and could need immediate medical or surgical intervention. Neurocritical Care provides a comprehensive overview of current developments in intensive care neurology, neurosurgery and neuroanesthesia and includes information about new therapeutic avenues and technological innovations. Neurocritical Care is the official journal of the Neurocritical Care Society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信