Search

BackgroundBenzodiazepine-refractory, or established, status epilepticus is thought to be of similar pathophysiology in children and adults, but differences in underlying aetiology and pharmacodynamics might differentially affect response to therapy. In the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) we compared the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate in established status epilepticus, and here we describe our results after extending enrolment in children to compare outcomes in three age groups.MethodsIn this multicentre, double-blind, response-adaptive, randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients from 58 hospital emergency departments across the USA. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 2 years or older, had been treated for a generalised convulsive seizure of longer than 5 min duration with adequate doses of benzodiazepines, and continued to have persistent or recurrent convulsions in the emergency department for at least 5 min and no more than 30 min after the last dose of benzodiazepine. Patients were randomly assigned in a response-adaptive manner, using Bayesian methods and stratified by age group (65 years), to levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, or valproate. All patients, investigators, study staff, and pharmacists were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was absence of clinically apparent seizures with improved consciousness and without additional antiseizure medication at 1 h from start of drug infusion. The primary safety outcome was life-threatening hypotension or cardiac arrhythmia. The efficacy and safety outcomes were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01960075.FindingsBetween Nov 3, 2015, and Dec 29, 2018, we enrolled 478 patients and 462 unique patients were included: 225 children (aged 65 years). 175 (38%) patients were randomly assigned to levetiracetam, 142 (31%) to fosphenyltoin, and 145 (31%) were to valproate. Baseline characteristics were balanced across treatments within age groups. The primary efficacy outcome was met in those treated with levetiracetam for 52% (95% credible interval 41-62) of children, 44% (33-55) of adults, and 37% (19-59) of older adults; with fosphenytoin in 49% (38-61) of children, 46% (34-59) of adults, and 35% (17-59) of older adults; and with valproate in 52% (41-63) of children, 46% (34-58) of adults, and 47% (25-70) of older adults. No differences were detected in efficacy or primary safety outcome by drug within each age group. With the exception of endotracheal intubation in children, secondary safety outcomes did not significantly differ by drug within each age group.InterpretationChildren, adults, and older adults with established status epilepticus respond similarly to levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate, with treatment success in approximately half of patients. Any of the three drugs can be considered as a potential first-choice, second-line drug for benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus.FundingNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health.

ObjectivesTo estimate the impact of goal-directed therapy on outcome after traumatic brain injury, our team applied goal-directed therapy to standardize care in patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury, who were enrolled in a large multicenter clinical trial.DesignPlanned secondary analysis of data from Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III, a large, prospective, multicenter clinical trial.SettingForty-two trauma centers within the Neurologic Emergencies Treatment Trials network.PatientsEight-hundred eighty-two patients were enrolled within 4 hours of injury after nonpenetrating traumatic brain injury characterized by Glasgow Coma Scale score of 4-12.Measurements and main resultsPhysiologic goals were defined a priori in order to standardize care across 42 sites participating in Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III. Physiologic data collection occurred hourly; laboratory data were collected according to local ICU protocols and at a minimum of once per day. Physiologic transgressions were predefined as substantial deviations from the normal range of goal-directed therapy. Each hour where goal-directed therapy was not achieved was classified as a "transgression." Data were adjudicated electronically and via expert review. Six-month outcomes included mortality and the stratified dichotomy of the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. For each variable, the association between outcome and either: 1) the occurrence of a transgression or 2) the proportion of time spent in transgression was estimated via logistic regression model.ResultsFor the 882 patients enrolled in Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III, mortality was 12.5%. Prolonged time spent in transgression was associated with increased mortality in the full cohort for hemoglobin less than 8 gm/dL (p = 0.0006), international normalized ratio greater than 1.4 (p < 0.0001), glucose greater than 180 mg/dL (p = 0.0003), and systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg (p < 0.0001). In the patient subgroup with intracranial pressure monitoring, prolonged time spent in transgression was associated with increased mortality for intracranial pressure greater than or equal to 20 mm Hg (p < 0.0001), glucose greater than 180 mg/dL (p = 0.0293), hemoglobin less than 8 gm/dL (p = 0.0220), or systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg (p = 0.0114). Covariates inversely related to mortality included: a single occurrence of mean arterial pressure less than 65 mm Hg (p = 0.0051) or systolic blood pressure greater than 180 mm Hg (p = 0.0002).ConclusionsThe Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III clinical trial rigorously monitored compliance with goal-directed therapy after traumatic brain injury. Multiple significant associations between physiologic transgressions, morbidity, and mortality were observed. These data suggest that effective goal-directed therapy in traumatic brain injury may provide an opportunity to improve patient outcomes.

ObjectiveTraumatic brain injury (TBI) causes more than 2.5 million emergency department visits, hospitalizations, or deaths annually. Prehospital endotracheal intubation has been associated with poor outcomes in patients with TBI in several retrospective observational studies. We evaluated the relationship between prehospital intubation, functional outcomes, and mortality using high quality data on clinical practice collected prospectively during a randomized multicenter clinical trial.MethodsProTECT III was a multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of early administration of progesterone in 882 patients with acute moderate to severe nonpenetrating TBI. Patients were excluded if they had an index GCS of 3 and nonreactive pupils, those with withdrawal of life support on arrival, and if they had documented prolonged hypotension and/or hypoxia. Prehospital intubation was performed as per local clinical protocol in each participating EMS system. Models for favorable outcome and mortality included prehospital intubation, method of transport, index GCS, age, race, and ethnicity as independent variables. Significance was set at α = 0.05. Favorable outcome was defined by a stratified dichotomy of the GOS-E scores in which the definition of favorable outcome depended on the severity of the initial injury.ResultsFavorable outcome was more frequent in the 349 subjects with prehospital intubation (57.3%) than in the other 533 patients (46.0%, p = 0.003). Mortality was also lower in the prehospital intubation group (13.8% v. 19.5%, p = 0.03). Logistic regression analysis of prehospital intubation and mortality, adjusted for index GCS, showed that odds of dying for those with prehospital intubation were 47% lower than for those that were not intubated (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.36-0.78). 279 patients with prehospital intubation were transported by air. Modeling transport method and mortality, adjusted for index GCS, showed increased odds of dying in those transported by ground compared to those transported by air (OR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.40-3.15). Decreased odds of dying trended among those with prehospital intubation adjusted for transport method, index GCS score at randomization, age, and race/ethnicity (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.37-1.31).ConclusionsIn this study that excluded moribund patients, prehospital intubation was performed primarily in patients transported by air. Prehospital intubation and air medical transport together were associated with favorable outcomes and lower mortality. Prehospital intubation was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality regardless of transport method or severity of injury.

Key Points: Question: Is anticoagulation superior to antiplatelet therapy for prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with cryptogenic stroke and evidence of atrial cardiopathy? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial that included 1015 patients, the rate of recurrent stroke did not significantly differ between the apixaban group (annualized rate, 4.4%) and the aspirin group (annualized rate, 4.4%). Meaning: In patients with cryptogenic stroke and evidence of atrial cardiopathy without atrial fibrillation, apixaban did not significantly reduce recurrent stroke risk compared with aspirin. Importance: Atrial cardiopathy is associated with stroke in the absence of clinically apparent atrial fibrillation. It is unknown whether anticoagulation, which has proven benefit in atrial fibrillation, prevents stroke in patients with atrial cardiopathy and no atrial fibrillation. Objective: To compare anticoagulation vs antiplatelet therapy for secondary stroke prevention in patients with cryptogenic stroke and evidence of atrial cardiopathy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 randomized clinical trial of 1015 participants with cryptogenic stroke and evidence of atrial cardiopathy, defined as P-wave terminal force greater than 5000 μV × ms in electrocardiogram lead V1, serum N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level greater than 250 pg/mL, or left atrial diameter index of 3 cm/m2 or greater on echocardiogram. Participants had no evidence of atrial fibrillation at the time of randomization. Enrollment and follow-up occurred from February 1, 2018, through February 28, 2023, at 185 sites in the National Institutes of Health StrokeNet and the Canadian Stroke Consortium. Interventions: Apixaban, 5 mg or 2.5 mg, twice daily (n = 507) vs aspirin, 81 mg, once daily (n = 508). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy outcome in a time-to-event analysis was recurrent stroke. All participants, including those diagnosed with atrial fibrillation after randomization, were analyzed according to the groups to which they were randomized. The primary safety outcomes were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and other major hemorrhage. Results: With 1015 of the target 1100 participants enrolled and mean follow-up of 1.8 years, the trial was stopped for futility after a planned interim analysis. The mean (SD) age of participants was 68.0 (11.0) years, 54.3% were female, and 87.5% completed the full duration of follow-up. Recurrent stroke occurred in 40 patients in the apixaban group (annualized rate, 4.4%) and 40 patients in the aspirin group (annualized rate, 4.4%) (hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.64-1.55]). Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 0 patients taking apixaban and 7 patients taking aspirin (annualized rate, 1.1%). Other major hemorrhages occurred in 5 patients taking apixaban (annualized rate, 0.7%) and 5 patients taking aspirin (annualized rate, 0.8%) (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.29-3.52]). Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with cryptogenic stroke and evidence of atrial cardiopathy without atrial fibrillation, apixaban did not significantly reduce recurrent stroke risk compared with aspirin. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03192215 This clinical trial compares the effectiveness of anticoagulation vs antiplatelet therapy for secondary stroke prevention in patients with cryptogenic stroke and evidence of atrial cardiopathy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Early treatment of moderate/severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) with progesterone does not improve clinical outcomes. This is in contrast with findings from pre-clinical studies of progesterone in TBI. To understand the reasons for the negative clinical trial, we investigated whether progesterone treatment has the desired biological effect of decreasing brain cell death. We quantified brain cell death using serum levels of biomarkers of glial and neuronal cell death (glial fibrillary acidic protein [GFAP], ubiquitin carboxy-terminal hydrolase-L1 [UCH-L1], S100 calcium-binding protein B [S100B], and Alpha II Spectrin Breakdown Product 150 [SBDP]) in the Biomarkers of Injury and Outcome–Progesterone for Traumatic Brain Injury, Experimental Clinical Treatment (BIO-ProTECT) study. Serum levels of GFAP, UCHL1, S100B, and SBDP were measured at baseline (≤4 h post-injury and before administration of study drug) and at 24 and 48 h post-injury. Serum progesterone levels were measured at 24 and 48 h post-injury. The primary outcome of ProTECT was based on the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended assessed at 6 months post-randomization. We found that at baseline, there were no differences in biomarker levels between subjects randomized to progesterone treatment and those randomized to placebo (p > 0.10). Similarly, at 24 and 48 h post-injury, there were no differences in biomarker levels in the progesterone versus placebo groups (p > 0.15). There was no statistically significant correlation between serum progesterone concentrations and biomarker values obtained at 24 and 48 h. When examined as a continuous variable, baseline biomarker levels did not modify the association between progesterone treatment and neurological outcome (p of interaction term >0.39 for all biomarkers). We conclude that progesterone treatment does not decrease levels of biomarkers of glial and neuronal cell death during the first 48 h post-injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Hyperglycemia during acute ischemic stroke is common and is associated with worse outcomes. The efficacy of intensive treatment of hyperglycemia in this setting remains unknown.Objectives: To determine the efficacy of intensive treatment of hyperglycemia during acute ischemic stroke.Design, Setting, and Participants: The Stroke Hyperglycemia Insulin Network Effort (SHINE) randomized clinical trial included adult patients with hyperglycemia (glucose concentration of >110 mg/dL if had diabetes or ≥150 mg/dL if did not have diabetes) and acute ischemic stroke who were enrolled within 12 hours from stroke onset at 63 US sites between April 2012 and August 2018; follow-up ended in November 2018. The trial included 1151 patients who met eligibility criteria.Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive continuous intravenous insulin using a computerized decision support tool (target blood glucose concentration of 80-130 mg/dL [4.4-7.2 mmol/L]; intensive treatment group: n = 581) or insulin on a sliding scale that was administered subcutaneously (target blood glucose concentration of 80-179 mg/dL [4.4-9.9 mmol/L]; standard treatment group: n = 570) for up to 72 hours.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients with a favorable outcome based on the 90-day modified Rankin Scale score (a global stroke disability scale ranging from 0 [no symptoms or completely recovered] to 6 [death]) that was adjusted for baseline stroke severity.Results: Among 1151 patients who were randomized (mean age, 66 years [SD, 13.1 years]; 529 [46%] women, 920 [80%] with diabetes), 1118 (97%) completed the trial. Enrollment was stopped for futility based on prespecified interim analysis criteria. During treatment, the mean blood glucose level was 118 mg/dL (6.6 mmol/L) in the intensive treatment group and 179 mg/dL (9.9 mmol/L) in the standard treatment group. A favorable outcome occurred in 119 of 581 patients (20.5%) in the intensive treatment group and in 123 of 570 patients (21.6%) in the standard treatment group (adjusted relative risk, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.87 to 1.08], P = .55; unadjusted risk difference, -0.83% [95% CI, -5.72% to 4.06%]). Treatment was stopped early for hypoglycemia or other adverse events in 65 of 581 patients (11.2%) in the intensive treatment group and in 18 of 570 patients (3.2%) in the standard treatment group. Severe hypoglycemia occurred only among patients in the intensive treatment group (15/581 [2.6%]; risk difference, 2.58% [95% CI, 1.29% to 3.87%]).Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute ischemic stroke and hyperglycemia, treatment with intensive vs standard glucose control for up to 72 hours did not result in a significant difference in favorable functional outcome at 90 days. These findings do not support using intensive glucose control in this setting.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01369069. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]