Fast Acute Sedation at Intensive Care vs. High-Dose IV Anti-seizure Medication for Treatment of Non-convulsive Status Epilepticus:A Randomized, Multicenter Trial

BACKGROUND: The management of refractory status epilepticus (SE) remains an area of low evidence with varying management strategies. Treatment in the ICU is often postponed due to potential complications from sedation, and it is unknown if its efficacy is superior to additional treatment attempts with IV anti-seizure medications (ASMs). The Fast Acute Sedation at Intensive Care vs. High-Dose IV Anti-Seizure Medication for Treatment of Non-Convulsive Status Epilepticus (FAST) trial aims to compare the efficacy of rapid sedation in the ICU vs. add-on high-dose IV ASM alone for the treatment of refractory SE.METHODS/RESULTS: This prospective, randomized, multicenter trial will enroll adult patients with non-convulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) who either meet current EEG criteria or have unambiguous NCSE with minor motor phenomena ("subtle SE") but without ongoing tonic-clonic seizures that are refractory to benzodiazepines and treatment with at least one second-line ASM. Patients will be randomized to receive either rapid deep sedation for 20 hours with propofol and eventually low-dose midazolam or additional high-dose IV anticonvulsant therapy (levetiracetam, valproate, fosphenytoin, lacosamide, or topiramate) in the intermediate care unit. The primary endpoint is treatment failure, either defined as NCSE on EEG 24 hours after randomization or persistent NCSE after 3 hours despite therapy on continuous EEG or clinically. Secondary endpoints include assessment of new-onset neurologic deficits and modified Rankin Scale at discharge, economic analyses, length of hospital stay, in-hospital infections, and survival. Evaluations will be performed at baseline, discharge, and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. The target sample size is 116 patients; we expect to have to randomize about 140 patients to reach the required number of patients.CONCLUSIONS: The FAST trial is the first randomized clinical trial to investigate refractory NCSE. Regardless of the outcome, the results of this trial protocol will provide new class 1 evidence for the treatment of NCSE and establish the standard of care for this patient population in the future.TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU CT: 2024-515507-18-00/clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05263674.</p

Exploring SLEEPINESS through home monitoring with ultra-long-term subcutaneous EEG and ecological momentary assessment in sleepy treatment naïve obstructive sleep apnea patients starting CPAP treatment—A study protocol article

IntroductionExcessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is a key symptom for patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Despite important limitations in the longitudinal monitoring of EDS, the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test, and the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) are the best available objective tests to predict EDS. Limited information exists on the day-to-day fluctuations of sleepiness symptoms from the everyday life perspective of OSA patients. The most feared is sudden sleep episodes that cause traffic accidents. The following study protocol investigates the novel possibilities of ultra-long-term Electroencephalography (EEG) (ULT-EEG) home monitoring in sleepy OSA patients with a subcutaneous implant. We hypothesize that the high-frequency testing from ULT-EEG, in combination with an ecological momentary assessment (EMA), can provide the information to develop new electrophysiological monitoring of sleep propensity as an alternative to the well-established, yet subjective, ESS.MethodsThis clinical exploratory and experimental study will include 15 treatment-naïve patients with severe OSA, with a baseline ESS score above 10. The subjects will be implanted with a two-channel subcutaneous EEG monitoring device upon inclusion and a confirmative polysomnography MSLT. Subcutaneous EEG is recorded 24/7 for 6 weeks before and 6 weeks during continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment. Daily assessments with the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale, the Psychomotor Vigilance Task test, and a sleep/nap diary will be collected using EMA methods.DiscussionThis study combines data collection from sleepy OSA patients' natural environments using ULT-EEG and EMA methods to obtain sleepiness metrics suitable for developing and preliminarily validating the possibilities of ULT-EEG sleepiness monitoring. We aim to prove a new concept of monitoring sleepiness symptoms in OSA patients and gain new insights into CPAP-related sleepiness rehabilitation.Ethics and disseminationAll participants will provide written informed consent to participate in this study. Ethical approval from the Region Zealand Ethics Committee on 13/09/2021 (SJ939, EMN-2021-06803). The study will be conducted in accordance with local legislation and institutional requirements and comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study.

INTRODUCTION: The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. METHODS: We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions. RESULTS: All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers. CONCLUSION: Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches

Variation in general supportive and preventive intensive care management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 66 neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study

Abstract Background General supportive and preventive measures in the intensive care management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) aim to prevent or limit secondary brain injury and optimize recovery. The aim of this survey was to assess and quantify variation in perceptions on intensive care unit (ICU) management of patients with TBI in European neurotrauma centers. Methods We performed a survey as part of the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. We analyzed 23 questions focused on: 1) circulatory and respiratory management; 2) fever control; 3) use of corticosteroids; 4) nutrition and glucose management; and 5) seizure prophylaxis and treatment. Results The survey was completed predominantly by intensivists (n = 33, 50%) and neurosurgeons (n = 23, 35%) from 66 centers (97% response rate). The most common cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) target was > 60 mmHg (n = 39, 60%) and/or an individualized target (n = 25, 38%). To support CPP, crystalloid fluid loading (n = 60, 91%) was generally preferred over albumin (n = 15, 23%), and vasopressors (n = 63, 96%) over inotropes (n = 29, 44%). The most commonly reported target of partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood (PaCO2) was 36–40 mmHg (4.8–5.3 kPa) in case of controlled intracranial pressure (ICP) < 20 mmHg (n = 45, 69%) and PaCO2 target of 30–35 mmHg (4–4.7 kPa) in case of raised ICP (n = 40, 62%). Almost all respondents indicated to generally treat fever (n = 65, 98%) with paracetamol (n = 61, 92%) and/or external cooling (n = 49, 74%). Conventional glucose management (n = 43, 66%) was preferred over tight glycemic control (n = 18, 28%). More than half of the respondents indicated to aim for full caloric replacement within 7 days (n = 43, 66%) using enteral nutrition (n = 60, 92%). Indications for and duration of seizure prophylaxis varied, and levetiracetam was mostly reported as the agent of choice for both seizure prophylaxis (n = 32, 49%) and treatment (n = 40, 61%). Conclusions Practice preferences vary substantially regarding general supportive and preventive measures in TBI patients at ICUs of European neurotrauma centers. These results provide an opportunity for future comparative effectiveness research, since a more evidence-based uniformity in good practices in general ICU management could have a major impact on TBI outcome