Observational studyClinical drug investigation2015
Observational study of intravenous lacosamide in patients with convulsive versus non-convulsive status epilepticus.
Observational study in Clinical drug investigation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Patterns of levetiracetam and lacosamide use for treatment of status epilepticus with respect to clinical features and prior antiseizure medications.BMC neurology · 2026Observational
- Diagnosis, treatment, and outcome prediction of non-convulsive status epilepticus in unconscious patients in intensive care units.Neurological research and practice · 2025Review
- Review
- Treatment of Refractory Convulsive Status Epilepticus: A Comprehensive Review by the American Epilepsy Society Treatments Committee.Epilepsy currents · 2020Article
- Antiseizure medications in critical care: an update.Current opinion in critical care · 2019Review
- Review
- The Safety and Effectiveness of Intravenous Lacosamide for Refractory Status Epilepticus in the Critically Ill.Neurocritical care · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesStatus epilepticus (SE) is an important emergency situation associated with high morbidity and mortality. The goal of pharmacological therapy-rapid seizure termination-is only achieved in just over half of patients with first-line anti-epileptic drug (AED) therapy and many patients require second and higher lines of AEDs to achieve seizure termination; therefore, there is a clear need for more effective treatment options. Lacosamide is a relatively new AED and the intravenous formulation has shown promise for treatment of SE. The aim of the current study was to compare electroencephalographic (EEG) response and seizure termination with intravenous lacosamide (±other AEDs) in patients with convulsive versus non-convulsive SE, in a Spanish intensive care setting.
methodsIn this prospective, observational study, patients with convulsive or non-convulsive SE who received intravenous lacosamide 400 mg/day for 8 days were compared in terms of EEG response and seizure termination. Adverse events were not specifically assessed.
resultsFifty-three patients (69.8 % male; mean age 55.2 years) were treated with lacosamide (mean dose 390.6 mg) as first- (20.8 %), second- (34 %), third (22.6 %) or fourth-line (22.6 %) treatment for convulsive (n = 23, 43.4 %) or non-convulsive (n = 30, 56.6 %) SE. The majority of patients (73.6 %) had a comorbid condition, predominantly hypertension (35.8 %), and most (79.2 %) received at least one concomitant AED, including midazolam (54.7 %), valproic acid (52.8 %), and levetiracetam (30.2 %). Patient characteristics and treatment received did not differ significantly between the convulsive and non-convulsive SE groups. EEG recordings following lacosamide treatment demonstrated the elimination of paroxysmal activity (disappearance and/or attenuation of epileptiform activity in >60 % of recording time) in 56.6 % of patients; 69.6 % of convulsive and 46.7 % of non-convulsive SE groups. Among all patients, 90.6 % showed some EEG improvement (disappearance of epileptiform activity in <30 % total recording time or disappearance and/or attenuation of epileptiform activity in 30-60 % total recording time); and there was no significant between-group difference for achievement of seizure termination (90.0 vs. 91.3 % for non-convulsive vs. convulsive SE).
conclusionsIntravenous lacosamide (±other AEDs) was similarly effective in patients with convulsive or non-convulsive SE. Further investigation into the use of lacosamide in the treatment of SE is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.