C. Dagron

Prehospital treatment with levetiracetam plus clonazepam or placebo plus clonazepam in status epilepticus (SAMUKeppra): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND Generalised convulsive status epilepticus (GCSE) should be treated quickly. Benzodiazepines are the only drug treatment available so far that is effective before admission to hospital. We assessed whether addition of the antiepileptic drug levetiracetam to the benzodiazepine clonazepam would improve prehospital treatment of GCSE. METHODS We did a prehospital, randomised, double-blind, phase 3, placebo-controlled, superiority trial to determine the efficacy of adding intravenous levetiracetam (2.5 g) to clonazepam (1 mg) in treatment of GCSE in 13 emergency medical service centres and 26 hospital departments in France. Randomisation was done at the Paris Descartes Clinical Research Unit with a list of random numbers generated by computer. Adults with convulsions lasting longer than 5 min were randomly assigned (1:1) by prehospital physicians to receive levetiracetam or placebo in combination with clonazepam. All physicians and paramedics were masked to group assignments. If the status epilepticus lasted beyond 5 min after drug injection, a second dose of 1 mg clonazepam was given. The primary outcome was cessation of convulsions within 15 min of drug injection. We analysed the modified intention-to-treat population that had received at least one injection of clonazepam and levetiracetam or placebo, excluding patients without valid consent and those randomised more than once. The trial is registered at EudraCT, number 2007-005782-35. FINDINGS Between July 20, 2009, and Dec 15, 2012, 107 patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo and 96 were assigned to receive levetiracetam. The trial was discontinued on Dec 15, 2012 when interim analysis showed no evidence of a treatment difference, and 68 patients in each group were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Convulsions stopped at 15 min of drug injection in 57 of 68 patients (84%) receiving clonazepam and placebo and in 50 of 68 patients (74%) receiving clonazepam and levetiracetam (percentage difference -10.3%, 95% CI -24.0 to 3.4). Three deaths, 19 of 47 (40 %) serious adverse events, and 90 of 197 (46%) non-serious events were reported in the levetiracetam group, and four deaths, 28 of 47 (60%) serious events, and 107 of 197 (54%) non-serious events were reported in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION The addition of levetiracetam to clonazepam treatment presented no advantage over clonazepam treatment alone in the control of GCSE before admission to hospital. Future prehospital trials could assess the efficacy of clonazepam alone as a first-line treatment in status epilepticus and the efficacy of a second injection of clonazepam with another antiepileptic drug as second-line treatment. FUNDING UCB Pharma.

Comparison of intravenous and intraosseous access by pre-hospital medical emergency personnel with and without CBRN protective equipment.

INTRODUCTION Rapid intravascular access is a prerequisite component of emergency care and resuscitation. Peripheral intravenous (IV) access is the first-choice for most of the medical or trauma patients, but may be delayed in emergency conditions because of various difficulties. Elsewhere, intraosseous (IO) access may now be easily performed with a new semi-automatic battery-powered IO-insertion device (EZ-IO. The aim of this study was to compare the overall time to establish IO infusion with the EZ-IO device and the equivalent time for peripheral IV infusion, performed by emergency personnel in standard (No-CBRN) and in chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) protective equipment. METHODS Nine nurses and 16 physicians randomly performed 4 procedures on a training manikin: IV and IO access under No-CBRN conditions and IV and IO under CBRN conditions. The time for each infusion attempt included all the steps essential for a simulated safe clinical use of infusion. RESULTS Under No-CBRN conditions, the time to establish IO infusion was shorter than the equivalent IV time (50+/-9 vs 70+/-30s). Similarly, under CBRN conditions, the time for IO infusion was shorter than for IV infusion (65+/-17 vs 104+/-30s). The mean time saved by IO infusion over IV infusion was respectively 20+/-24s (P<0.001) and 39+/-20s (P<0.001) under No-CBRN and CBRN conditions. CONCLUSION The time to establish IO infusion was significantly shorter than that for peripheral IV infusion, under both No-CBRN and CBRN conditions. Further clinical studies are required to confirm that IO access would effectively save time over IV access in real pre-hospital emergency settings.

A prehospital randomized trial in convulsive status epilepticus.

Therapeutic strategies for patients with generalized convulsive status epilepticus (GCSE) need to be improved. We present the design of an add‐on, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, phase III clinical trial, to compare the efficacy for GCSE of intravenous levetiracetam in association with clonazepam versus clonazepam alone. In the therapeutic arm, 1 mg clonazepam is injected together with 2500 mg levetiracetam over 5 min. In the control arm, 1 mg clonazepam is injected together with a placebo over 5 min. This ongoing study is managed by prehospital physicians within emergency mobile units (SAMU). Adult patients with GCSE lasting more than 5 minutes are included in the study. The primary outcome measure is the percentage of patients with cessation of convulsions within 15 minutes of the onset of initial injections. Emergency medical consent is obtained from family members. An informed consent for continued participation is also obtained from patients when they wake. The study is currently recruiting participants.

Coronary lesions in refractory out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) treated by extra corporeal pulmonary resuscitation (ECPR)

PURPOSE Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is a second line treatment for refractory cardiac arrest (R-OHCA). Timing of ECPR before performing coronary angiography (CAG) is still debated. The aim of the study was to describe the clinical and angiographic characteristics of the largest cohort of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients undergoing ECPR. METHODS All refractory OHCA patients with ECPR managed by the prehospital mobile intensive care unit (MoICU of the SAMU) in Paris (France) were prospectively included from October 2014 to December 2016. RESULTS Among 74 patients included over the period, 54 patients had coronary artery disease (CAD). There is a trend toward the CAD patients being older but it did not meet statistical significance (55.3 ± 11.8 vs. 50.6 ± 12.8, p = 0,14). Patients were more frequently men and smokers (p = 0.03 for both). The proportion of initial shockable rhythm tended to be higher in patients with CAD (71% vs. 55%). The rate of 1-, 2-, and 3-vessel disease were 43%, 35% and 22% respectively. The Syntax Score was 18 ± 9 and the lesions in each epicardial vessel were mainly proximal. Percutaneous coronary intervention was performed ad hoc in 49 patients (91%). Complete revascularization was performed in 64%. Inhospital death was numerically lower (65% vs. 75%) in patients with CAD, especially in patients with initial shockable rhythm. CONCLUSION In 74 refractory OHCA patients treated with ECPR implanted by a prehospital mobile intensive care unit, the rate of CAD was high (54/74) especially in patients with shockable rhythm. The majority of patients presented with double or triple vessel disease and proximal lesions. The severity and extension of CAD may explain the refractory nature of the cardiac arrest.