Seizure cluster: Definition, prevalence, consequences, and management

•Seizure clusters are common in patients with refractory epilepsy.•There is no agreed upon definition for seizure clusters.•Rescue medications are underutilized in seizure clusters.•Non-rectal, non-IV benzodiazepines are safe and effective in the outpatient management of seizure clusters. To summarize definitions, prevalence, risk factors, consequences, and acute management of seizure clusters using rescue medications. We searched MEDLINE for studies that assessed definitions, clinical characteristics, outcomes, and use of rescue medication for aborting seizure clusters. Different clinical and statistical definitions for seizure clusters have been proposed, including: ≥3 seizures in 24 h, ≥2 seizures in 24 h, and ≥2 seizures in 6 h. Most studies of seizure clusters have been conducted in tertiary epilepsy centers, with refractory epilepsy patients. Patients with severe and poorly controlled epilepsy are more likely to experience seizure clusters. Seizure clusters can result in increased health care utilization and have negative impact on the quality of life of patients and caregivers. Use of benzodiazepine rescue medications in acute management of seizure clusters can help avoid progression to status epilepticus and reduce emergency room visits. Rescue medications are underutilized in seizure clusters. Currently, rectal diazepam gel is the only FDA approved rescue medication for seizure clusters. In addition, buccal midazolam is approved in European countries for treatment of prolonged seizures. However, various non-rectal non-IV benzodiazepines are safe and effective in treating acute seizures and clusters. Most patients and caregivers preferred non-rectal routes. Identifying patients that are at high risk for seizure clusters, providing them with formal action plans and educating them about use of rescue medication for seizure clusters can help ameliorate the outcomes in this group of epilepsy patients

Severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) from influenza in adult patients in Chile: the experience of a sentinel hospital

Objective. To 1) describe clinical characteristics of adult patients in Chile with severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) associated with influenza viruses, and 2) analyze virus subtypes identified in specimens collected from those patients, hospital resources used in clinical management, clinical evolution, and risk factors associated with a fatal outcome, using observational data from the SARI surveillance network (SARInet). Methods. Adults hospitalized from 1 July 2011 to 31 December 2015 with influenza-associated SARI at a SARI sentinel surveillance hospital in Santiago were identified and the presence of influenza in all cases confirmed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), using respiratory samples. Results. A total of 221 patients (mean age: 74.1 years) were hospitalized with influenza-associated SARI during the study period. Of this study cohort, 91.4% had risk factors for complications and 34.3% had been vaccinated during the most recent campaign. Pneumonia was the most frequent clinical manifestation, occurring in 57.0% of the cohort; other manifestations included influenza-like illness, exacerbated chronic bronchitis, decompensated heart failure, and asthmatic crisis. Cases occurred year-round, with an epidemic peak during autumn–winter. Both influenza A (H1N1pdm09 and H3N2) and B virus co-circulated. Critical care beds were required for 26.7% of the cohort, and 19.5% needed ventilatory assistance. Multivariate analysis identified four significant factors associated with in-hospital mortality: 1) being bedridden (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 22.3; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.0–164); 2) admission to critical care unit (aOR: 8.9; CI: 1.44–55); 3) Pa02/Fi02 ratio 1 mg/dL) (aOR: 5.47; CI: 1.20–24). Seasonal influenza vaccine was identified as a significant protective factor (aOR: 0.14; CI: 0.021–0.90). Conclusions. Influenza-associated SARI affected mainly elderly patients with underlying conditions. Most patients evolved to respiratory failure and more than one-quarter required critical care beds. Clinical presentation was variable. Death was associated with host characteristics and disease-associated conditions, and vaccine was protective. Virus type did not influence outcome

Prevalence and Predictors of Seizure Clusters in Pediatric Patients With Epilepsy: The Harvard-Yale Pediatric Seizure Cluster Study

Determine the prevalence of seizure clusters (two or more seizures in six hours), use of rescue medications, and adverse outcomes associated with seizure clusters in pediatric patients with a range of epilepsy severities, and identify risk factors predictive of seizure clusters. Prospective observational two-center study, including phone call and seizure diary follow-up for 12 months in patients with epilepsy aged one month to 18 years. We classified patients into three risk groups based on seizures within the prior year: high, seizure cluster (two or more seizures within one day); intermediate, at least one seizure but no days with two or more seizures; low, no seizures. One-third (32.3%; high risk, 72.4%; intermediate risk, 30.4%; low risk, 3.1%) of 297 patients had a seizure cluster during the study, including half (46.2%) of the patients with active seizures at baseline (intermediate- and high-risk groups combined). Emergency room visits or injuries were no more likely due to a seizure cluster than an isolated seizure. Rescue medications were utilized in 15.8% of patients in the high-risk group and 19.2% in the intermediate-risk group. History of status epilepticus (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.13; confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 4.16]), seizure frequency greater than four per month (aOR, 4.27; CI, 1.92 to 9.50), and high-risk group status (aOR, 6.42; CI, 2.97 to 13.87) were associated with greater odds of seizure cluster. Seizure clusters are common in pediatric patients with epilepsy. High seizure frequency was the strongest predictor of clusters. Rescue medications were underutilized. Future studies should evaluate the applicability and effectiveness of these medications for optimization of pediatric seizure cluster treatment and reduction of seizure-related emergency department visits, injuries, and mortality

Association of Time to Treatment With Short-term Outcomes for Pediatric Patients With Refractory Convulsive Status Epilepticus

IMPORTANCE Treatment delay for seizures can lead to longer seizure duration. Whether treatment delay is associated with major adverse outcomes, such as death, remains unknown. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether untimely first-line benzodiazepine treatment is associated with unfavorable short-term outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study included 218 pediatric patients admitted between June 1, 2011, and July 7, 2016, into the 11 tertiary hospitals in the United States within the Pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group. Patients, ranging in age from 1 month to 21 years, with refractory convulsive status epilepticus (RCSE) that did not stop after the administration of at least 2 antiseizure medications were included. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: those who received the first-line benzodiazepine treatment in less than 10 minutes and those who received it 10 or more minutes after seizure onset (untimely). Data were collected and analyzed from June 1, 2011, to July 7, 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was death during the related hospital admission. The secondary outcome was the need for continuous infusion for seizure termination. Multivariate analysis of mortality controlled for structural cause, febrile RCSE, age, and previous neurological history (including previous RCSE events). Use of continuous infusions was additionally adjusted for generalized RCSE, continuous RCSE, and 5 or more administrations of antiseizure medication. RESULTS A total of 218 patients were included, among whom 116 (53.2%) were male and the median (interquartile range) age was 4.0 (1.2-9.6) years. The RCSE started in the prehospital setting for 139 patients (63.8%). Seventy-four patients (33.9%) received their first-line benzodiazepine treatment in less than 10 minutes, and 144 (66.1%) received untimely first-line benzodiazepine treatment. Multivariate analysis showed that patients who received untimely first-line benzodiazepine treatment had higher odds of death (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 11.0; 95% CI, 1.43 to infinity; P = .02), had greater odds of receiving continuous infusion (AOR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.01-3.36; P = .047), had longer convulsive seizure duration (AOR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.38-4.88; P = .003), and had more frequent hypotension (AOR 2.3; 95% CI, 1.16-4.63; P = .02). In addition, the timing of the first-line benzodiazepine treatment was correlated with the timing of the second-line (95% CI, 0.64-0.95; P < .001) and third-line antiseizure medications (95% CI, 0.25-0.78; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among pediatric patients with RCSE, an untimely first-line benzodiazepine treatment is independently associated with a higher frequency of death, use of continuous infusions, longer convulsion duration, and more frequent hypotension. Results of this study raise the question as to whether poor outcomes could, in part, be prevented by earlier administration of treatment.Epilepsy Research Fund; Pediatric Epilepsy Research Foundation; Epilepsy Foundation of America [EF-213583]; American Epilepsy Society/Epilepsy Foundation of America Infrastructure Awards12 month embargo, April 2018This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]