Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32219682›Full record

Observational studyCNS drugs2020

Efficacy, Tolerability, and Safety of Concentrated Intranasal Midazolam Spray as Emergency Medication in Epilepsy Patients During Video-EEG Monitoring.

Anemone von Blomberg, Lara Kay, Susanne Knake, Sven Fuest, Johann Philipp Zöllner, Philipp S Reif, Eva Herrmann, Ümniye Balaban, Susanne Schubert-Bast, Felix Rosenow and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in CNS drugs, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Nose-to-brain drug delivery: from bench to bedside.Translational neurodegeneration · 2025
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Cattle BileFrontiers in pharmacology · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Anemone von BlombergEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16, Haus 95, 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Lara KayEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16, Haus 95, 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Susanne KnakeLOEWE Center for Personalized Translational Epilepsy Research (CePTER), Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Sven FuestEpilepsy Center Hessen and Department of Neurology, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg (Lahn), Germany.
Johann Philipp ZöllnerEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16, Haus 95, 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Philipp S ReifEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16, Haus 95, 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Eva HerrmannInstitute for Biostatistics and Mathematical Modeling, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Ümniye BalabanInstitute for Biostatistics and Mathematical Modeling, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Susanne Schubert-BastEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16, Haus 95, 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Felix RosenowEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16, Haus 95, 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Adam StrzelczykEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16, Haus 95, 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. strzelczyk@med.uni-frankfurt.de.
Goethe University Frankfurt · DEPhilipps University of Marburg · DEUniversity Hospital Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn efficient, well tolerated, and safe emergency treatment with a rapid onset of action is needed to prevent seizure clusters and to terminate prolonged seizures and status epilepticus.

objectivesThis study aimed to examine the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of intranasal midazolam (in-MDZ) spray in clinical practice.

methodsIn this retrospective, multicenter observational study, we evaluated all patients with peri-ictal application of in-MDZ during video-EEG monitoring at the epilepsy centers in Frankfurt and Marburg between 2 014 and 2017. For every patient, we analyzed the recurrence of any seizure or generalized tonic-clonic seizures after index seizures with and without in-MDZ administration. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were also evaluated.

resultsIn-MDZ was used in 243 patients with epilepsy (mean age 35.5 years; range 5-76 years; 46.5% female) for treatment of 459 seizures. A median dose of in-MDZ 5 mg (i.e., two puffs; range 2.5-15 mg) was administered within a median time from EEG seizure onset until in-MDZ application of 1.18 min [interquartile range (IQR) 1.27], while median time from clinical seizure onset until in-MDZ administration was 1.08 min (IQR 1.19). In-MDZ was given within 1 min after EEG seizure onset in 171 seizures. An intraindividual comparison of seizures with and without application of in-MDZ was feasible in 171 patients, demonstrating that in-MDZ reduced the occurrence of any (Cox proportional-hazard model p < 0.001) and generalized tonic-clonic seizure (Cox proportional-hazard model p = 0.0167) over a period of 24 h. The seizure-free timespan was doubled from a median of 5.0 h in controls to a median of 10.67 h after in-MDZ administration. We additionally clustered in-MDZ administrations for the 119 patients who received in-MDZ more than once, comparing them with the index cases without in-MDZ. Even when considering subsequent seizures with in-MDZ administration, a patient receiving in-MDZ is still half as likely to incur another seizure in the upcoming 24 h as compared with when the same patient does not receive in-MDZ (hazard ratio 0.50; 95% CI 0.42-0.60; p < 0.01). In-MDZ was well tolerated without major adverse events. The most common side effects were irritation of the nasal mucosa [37 cases (8.1%)], prolonged sedation [26 cases (5.7%)], and nausea and vomiting [12 cases (2.6%)]. A decline in oxygen saturation was measured after 78 seizures (17%).

conclusionWe conclude that in-MDZ is a safe and efficient treatment option to prevent short-term recurrence of seizures. In-MDZ can be administered very quickly by trained staff within 1-2 min after seizure onset. No major cardiocirculatory or respiratory adverse events were observed.

Indexed as

Administration, IntranasalAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolElectroencephalographyEmergenciesEpilepsyFemaleGABA ModulatorsHumansMaleMidazolamMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesGABA ModulatorsMidazolam

Identifiers

PMID32219682
PMCPMC7198639
OpenAlexW3014015225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.