Search

BACKGROUND: Cardiac arrest is a common and devastating emergency of both the heart and brain. More than 380,000 patients suffer out-of-hospital cardiac arrest annually in the USA. Induced cooling of comatose patients markedly improved neurological and functional outcomes in pivotal randomized clinical trials, but the optimal duration of therapeutic hypothermia has not yet been established. METHODS: This study is a multi-center randomized, response-adaptive, duration (dose) finding, comparative effectiveness clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment. We investigate two populations of adult comatose survivors of cardiac arrest to ascertain the shortest duration of cooling that provides the maximum treatment effect. The design is based on a statistical model of response as defined by the primary endpoint, a weighted 90-day mRS (modified Rankin Scale, a measure of neurologic disability), across the treatment arms. Subjects will initially be equally randomized between 12, 24, and 48 h of therapeutic cooling. After the first 200 subjects have been randomized, additional treatment arms between 12 and 48 h will be opened and patients will be allocated, within each initial cardiac rhythm type (shockable or non-shockable), by response adaptive randomization. As the trial continues, shorter and longer duration arms may be opened. A maximum sample size of 1800 subjects is proposed. Secondary objectives are to characterize: the overall safety and adverse events associated with duration of cooling, the effect on neuropsychological outcomes, and the effect on patient-reported quality of life measures. DISCUSSION: In vitro and in vivo studies have shown the neuroprotective effects of therapeutic hypothermia for cardiac arrest. We hypothesize that longer durations of cooling may improve either the proportion of patients that attain a good neurological recovery or may result in better recovery among the proportion already categorized as having a good outcome. If the treatment effect of cooling is increasing across duration, for at least some set of durations, then this provides evidence of the efficacy of cooling itself versus normothermia, even in the absence of a normothermia control arm, confirming previous RCTs for OHCA survivors of shockable rhythms and provides the first prospective controlled evidence of efficacy in those without initial shockable rhythms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04217551. Registered on 30 December 2019.

Multiple randomized, controlled clinical trials have yielded discordant results regarding the efficacy of convalescent plasma in outpatients, with some showing an approximately 2-fold reduction in risk and others showing no effect. We quantified binding and neutralizing antibody levels in 492 of the 511 participants from the Clinical Trial of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma in Outpatients (C3PO) of a single unit of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) versus saline infusion. In a subset of 70 participants, peripheral blood mononuclear cells were obtained to define the evolution of B and T cell responses through day 30. Binding and neutralizing antibody responses were approximately 2-fold higher 1 hour after infusion in recipients of CCP compared with saline plus multivitamin, but levels achieved by the native immune system by day 15 were almost 10-fold higher than those seen immediately after CCP administration. Infusion of CCP did not block generation of the host antibody response or skew B or T cell phenotype or maturation. Activated CD4+ and CD8+ T cells were associated with more severe disease outcome. These data show that CCP leads to a measurable boost in anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies but that the boost is modest and may not be sufficient to alter disease course.

BackgroundEarly administration of convalescent plasma obtained from blood donors who have recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) may prevent disease progression in acutely ill, high-risk patients with Covid-19.MethodsIn this randomized, multicenter, single-blind trial, we assigned patients who were being treated in an emergency department for Covid-19 symptoms to receive either one unit of convalescent plasma with a high titer of antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or placebo. All the patients were either 50 years of age or older or had one or more risk factors for disease progression. In addition, all the patients presented to the emergency department within 7 days after symptom onset and were in stable condition for outpatient management. The primary outcome was disease progression within 15 days after randomization, which was a composite of hospital admission for any reason, seeking emergency or urgent care, or death without hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included the worst severity of illness on an 8-category ordinal scale, hospital-free days within 30 days after randomization, and death from any cause.ResultsA total of 511 patients were enrolled in the trial (257 in the convalescent-plasma group and 254 in the placebo group). The median age of the patients was 54 years; the median symptom duration was 4 days. In the donor plasma samples, the median titer of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies was 1:641. Disease progression occurred in 77 patients (30.0%) in the convalescent-plasma group and in 81 patients (31.9%) in the placebo group (risk difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% credible interval, -6.0 to 9.8; posterior probability of superiority of convalescent plasma, 0.68). Five patients in the plasma group and 1 patient in the placebo group died. Outcomes regarding worst illness severity and hospital-free days were similar in the two groups.ConclusionsThe administration of Covid-19 convalescent plasma to high-risk outpatients within 1 week after the onset of symptoms of Covid-19 did not prevent disease progression. (SIREN-C3PO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04355767.).

Fosphenytoin (FOS) and its active form, phenytoin (PHT), levetiracetam (LEV), and valproic acid (VPA) are commonly used second-line treatments of status epilepticus. However, limited information is available regarding LEV and VPA concentrations following high intravenous doses, particularly in young children. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial, a blinded, comparative effectiveness study of FOS, LEV, and VPA for benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus provided an opportunity to investigate early drug concentrations. Patients aged ≥2 years who continued to seizure despite receiving adequate doses of benzodiazepines were randomly assigned to FOS, LEV, or VPA infused over 10 minutes. A sparse blood-sampling approach was used, with up to 2 samples collected per patient within 2 hours following drug administration. The objective of this work was to report early drug exposure of PHT, LEV, and VPA and plasma protein binding of PHT and VPA. Twenty-seven children with median (interquartile range) age of 4 (2.5-6.5) years were enrolled. The total plasma concentrations ranged from 69 to 151.3 μg/mL for LEV, 11.3 to 26.7 μg/mL for PHT and 126 to 223 μg/mL for VPA. Free fraction ranged from 4% to 19% for PHT and 17% to 51% for VPA. This is the first report in young children of LEV concentrations with convulsive status epilepticus as well as VPA concentrations after a 40 mg/kg dose. Several challenges limited patient enrollment and blood sampling. Additional studies with a larger sample size are required to evaluate the exposure-response relationships in this emergent condition.

ObjectiveTo quantify the association between early neurologic recovery, practice pattern variation, and endotracheal intubation during established status epilepticus, we performed a secondary analysis within the cohort of patients enrolled in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT).MethodsWe evaluated factors associated with the endpoint of endotracheal intubation occurring within 120 minutes of ESETT study drug initiation. We defined a blocked, stepwise multivariate regression, examining 4 phases during status epilepticus management: (1) baseline characteristics, (2) acute treatment, (3) 20-minute neurologic recovery, and (4) 60-minute recovery, including seizure cessation and improving responsiveness.ResultsOf 478 patients, 117 (24.5%) were intubated within 120 minutes. Among high-enrolling sites, intubation rates ranged from 4% to 32% at pediatric sites and 19% to 39% at adult sites. Baseline characteristics, including seizure precipitant, benzodiazepine dosing, and admission vital signs, provided limited discrimination for predicting intubation (area under the curve [AUC] 0.63). However, treatment at sites with an intubation rate in the highest (vs lowest) quartile strongly predicted endotracheal intubation independently of other treatment variables (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 8.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.08-21.4, model AUC 0.70). Site-specific variation was the factor most strongly associated with endotracheal intubation after adjustment for 20-minute (aOR 23.4, 95% CI 6.99-78.3, model AUC 0.88) and 60-minute (aOR 14.7, 95% CI 3.20-67.5, model AUC 0.98) neurologic recovery.ConclusionsEndotracheal intubation after established status epilepticus is strongly associated with site-specific practice pattern variation, independently of baseline characteristics, and early neurologic recovery and should not alone serve as a clinical trial endpoint in established status epilepticus.Trial registration informationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01960075.

ObjectiveThis study was undertaken to describe patterns of benzodiazepine use as first-line treatment of status epilepticus (SE) and test the association of benzodiazepine doses with response to second-line agents in patients enrolled in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT).MethodsPatients refractory to an adequate dose of benzodiazepines for the treatment of SE were enrolled in ESETT. Choice of benzodiazepine, doses given prior to administration of second-line agent, route of administration, setting, and patient weight were characterized. These were compared with guideline-recommended dosing. Logistic regression was used to determine the association of the first dose of benzodiazepine and the cumulative benzodiazepine dose with the response to second-line agent.ResultsFour hundred sixty patients were administered 1170 doses of benzodiazepines (669 lorazepam, 398 midazolam, 103 diazepam). Lorazepam was most frequently administered intravenously in the emergency department, midazolam intramuscularly or intravenously by the emergency medical services personnel, and diazepam rectally prior to ambulance arrival. The first dose of the first benzodiazepine (N = 460) was lower than guideline recommendations in 76% of midazolam administrations and 81% of lorazepam administrations. Among all administrations, >85% of midazolam and >76% of lorazepam administrations were lower than recommended. Higher first or cumulative benzodiazepine doses were not associated with better outcomes or clinical seizure cessation in response to second-line medications in these benzodiazepine-refractory seizures.SignificanceBenzodiazepines as first-line treatment of SE, particularly midazolam and lorazepam, are frequently underdosed throughout the United States. This broad and generalizable cohort confirms prior single site reports that underdosing is both pervasive and difficult to remediate. (ESETT ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01960075.).

The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial was a blinded, comparative-effectiveness study of fosphenytoin, levetiracetam, and valproic acid in benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus. The primary outcome was clinical seizure cessation and increased responsiveness without additional anticonvulsant medications. Weight-based dosing was capped at 75 kg. Hence, patients weighing >75 kg received a lower mg/kg dose. Logistic regression models were developed in 235 adults to determine the association of weight (≤ or >75 kg, ≤ or >90 kg), sex, treatment, and weight-normalized dose with the primary outcome and solely seizure cessation. The primary outcome was achieved in 45.1% and 42.5% of those ≤75 kg and >75 kg, respectively. Using univariate analyses, the likelihood of success for those >75 kg (odds ratio [OR] = 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.54-1.51) or >90 kg (OR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.42-1.66) was not statistically different compared with those ≤75 kg or ≤90 kg, respectively. Similarly, other predictors were not significantly associated with primary outcome or clinical seizure cessation. Our findings suggest that doses, capped at 75 kg, likely resulted in concentrations greater than those needed for outcome. Studies that include drug concentrations and heavier individuals are needed to confirm these findings.

BackgroundBenzodiazepine-refractory, or established, status epilepticus is thought to be of similar pathophysiology in children and adults, but differences in underlying aetiology and pharmacodynamics might differentially affect response to therapy. In the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) we compared the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate in established status epilepticus, and here we describe our results after extending enrolment in children to compare outcomes in three age groups.MethodsIn this multicentre, double-blind, response-adaptive, randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients from 58 hospital emergency departments across the USA. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 2 years or older, had been treated for a generalised convulsive seizure of longer than 5 min duration with adequate doses of benzodiazepines, and continued to have persistent or recurrent convulsions in the emergency department for at least 5 min and no more than 30 min after the last dose of benzodiazepine. Patients were randomly assigned in a response-adaptive manner, using Bayesian methods and stratified by age group (65 years), to levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, or valproate. All patients, investigators, study staff, and pharmacists were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was absence of clinically apparent seizures with improved consciousness and without additional antiseizure medication at 1 h from start of drug infusion. The primary safety outcome was life-threatening hypotension or cardiac arrhythmia. The efficacy and safety outcomes were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01960075.FindingsBetween Nov 3, 2015, and Dec 29, 2018, we enrolled 478 patients and 462 unique patients were included: 225 children (aged 65 years). 175 (38%) patients were randomly assigned to levetiracetam, 142 (31%) to fosphenyltoin, and 145 (31%) were to valproate. Baseline characteristics were balanced across treatments within age groups. The primary efficacy outcome was met in those treated with levetiracetam for 52% (95% credible interval 41-62) of children, 44% (33-55) of adults, and 37% (19-59) of older adults; with fosphenytoin in 49% (38-61) of children, 46% (34-59) of adults, and 35% (17-59) of older adults; and with valproate in 52% (41-63) of children, 46% (34-58) of adults, and 47% (25-70) of older adults. No differences were detected in efficacy or primary safety outcome by drug within each age group. With the exception of endotracheal intubation in children, secondary safety outcomes did not significantly differ by drug within each age group.InterpretationChildren, adults, and older adults with established status epilepticus respond similarly to levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate, with treatment success in approximately half of patients. Any of the three drugs can be considered as a potential first-choice, second-line drug for benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus.FundingNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health.

Convulsive status epilepticus (SE) is a relatively common emergency condition affecting individuals of all ages. The primary goal of treatment is prompt termination of seizures. Where first-line treatment with benzodiazepine has failed to achieve this, a condition known as established SE (ESE), there is uncertainty about which agent to use next. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) is a 3-arm (valproate (VPA), fosphenytoin (FOS), levetiracetam (LEV)), phase III, double-blind randomized comparative effectiveness study in patients aged 2 years and above with established convulsive SE. Enrollment was completed in January 2019, and the results are expected later this year. We discuss lessons learnt during the conduct of the study in relation to the following: ethical considerations; trial design and practical implementation in emergency settings, including pediatric and adult populations; quality assurance; and outcome determination where treating emergency clinicians may lack specialist expertise. We consider that the ESETT is already informing both clinical practice and future trial design. This article is part of the Special Issue "Proceedings of the 7th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures".

BackgroundThe choice of drugs for patients with status epilepticus that is refractory to treatment with benzodiazepines has not been thoroughly studied.MethodsIn a randomized, blinded, adaptive trial, we compared the efficacy and safety of three intravenous anticonvulsive agents - levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate - in children and adults with convulsive status epilepticus that was unresponsive to treatment with benzodiazepines. The primary outcome was absence of clinically evident seizures and improvement in the level of consciousness by 60 minutes after the start of drug infusion, without additional anticonvulsant medication. The posterior probabilities that each drug was the most or least effective were calculated. Safety outcomes included life-threatening hypotension or cardiac arrhythmia, endotracheal intubation, seizure recurrence, and death.ResultsA total of 384 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive levetiracetam (145 patients), fosphenytoin (118), or valproate (121). Reenrollment of patients with a second episode of status epilepticus accounted for 16 additional instances of randomization. In accordance with a prespecified stopping rule for futility of finding one drug to be superior or inferior, a planned interim analysis led to the trial being stopped. Of the enrolled patients, 10% were determined to have had psychogenic seizures. The primary outcome of cessation of status epilepticus and improvement in the level of consciousness at 60 minutes occurred in 68 patients assigned to levetiracetam (47%; 95% credible interval, 39 to 55), 53 patients assigned to fosphenytoin (45%; 95% credible interval, 36 to 54), and 56 patients assigned to valproate (46%; 95% credible interval, 38 to 55). The posterior probability that each drug was the most effective was 0.41, 0.24, and 0.35, respectively. Numerically more episodes of hypotension and intubation occurred in the fosphenytoin group and more deaths occurred in the levetiracetam group than in the other groups, but these differences were not significant.ConclusionsIn the context of benzodiazepine-refractory convulsive status epilepticus, the anticonvulsant drugs levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate each led to seizure cessation and improved alertness by 60 minutes in approximately half the patients, and the three drugs were associated with similar incidences of adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; ESETT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01960075.).

ObjectivesTo estimate the impact of goal-directed therapy on outcome after traumatic brain injury, our team applied goal-directed therapy to standardize care in patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury, who were enrolled in a large multicenter clinical trial.DesignPlanned secondary analysis of data from Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III, a large, prospective, multicenter clinical trial.SettingForty-two trauma centers within the Neurologic Emergencies Treatment Trials network.PatientsEight-hundred eighty-two patients were enrolled within 4 hours of injury after nonpenetrating traumatic brain injury characterized by Glasgow Coma Scale score of 4-12.Measurements and main resultsPhysiologic goals were defined a priori in order to standardize care across 42 sites participating in Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III. Physiologic data collection occurred hourly; laboratory data were collected according to local ICU protocols and at a minimum of once per day. Physiologic transgressions were predefined as substantial deviations from the normal range of goal-directed therapy. Each hour where goal-directed therapy was not achieved was classified as a "transgression." Data were adjudicated electronically and via expert review. Six-month outcomes included mortality and the stratified dichotomy of the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. For each variable, the association between outcome and either: 1) the occurrence of a transgression or 2) the proportion of time spent in transgression was estimated via logistic regression model.ResultsFor the 882 patients enrolled in Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III, mortality was 12.5%. Prolonged time spent in transgression was associated with increased mortality in the full cohort for hemoglobin less than 8 gm/dL (p = 0.0006), international normalized ratio greater than 1.4 (p < 0.0001), glucose greater than 180 mg/dL (p = 0.0003), and systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg (p < 0.0001). In the patient subgroup with intracranial pressure monitoring, prolonged time spent in transgression was associated with increased mortality for intracranial pressure greater than or equal to 20 mm Hg (p < 0.0001), glucose greater than 180 mg/dL (p = 0.0293), hemoglobin less than 8 gm/dL (p = 0.0220), or systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg (p = 0.0114). Covariates inversely related to mortality included: a single occurrence of mean arterial pressure less than 65 mm Hg (p = 0.0051) or systolic blood pressure greater than 180 mm Hg (p = 0.0002).ConclusionsThe Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III clinical trial rigorously monitored compliance with goal-directed therapy after traumatic brain injury. Multiple significant associations between physiologic transgressions, morbidity, and mortality were observed. These data suggest that effective goal-directed therapy in traumatic brain injury may provide an opportunity to improve patient outcomes.

For a variety of reasons including cheap computing, widespread adoption of electronic medical records, digitalization of imaging and biosignals, and rapid development of novel technologies, the amount of health care data being collected, recorded, and stored is increasing at an exponential rate. Yet despite these advances, methods for the valid, efficient, and ethical utilization of these data remain underdeveloped. Emergency care research, in particular, poses several unique challenges in this rapidly evolving field. A group of content experts was recently convened to identify research priorities related to barriers to the application of data science to emergency care research. These recommendations included: 1) developing methods for cross-platform identification and linkage of patients; 2) creating central, deidentified, open-access databases; 3) improving methodologies for visualization and analysis of intensively sampled data; 4) developing methods to identify and standardize electronic medical record data quality; 5) improving and utilizing natural language processing; 6) developing and utilizing syndrome or complaint-based based taxonomies of disease; 7) developing practical and ethical framework to leverage electronic systems for controlled trials; 8) exploring technologies to help enable clinical trials in the emergency setting; and 9) training emergency care clinicians in data science and data scientists in emergency care medicine. The background, rationale, and conclusions of these recommendations are included in the present article.

ObjectiveTraumatic brain injury (TBI) causes more than 2.5 million emergency department visits, hospitalizations, or deaths annually. Prehospital endotracheal intubation has been associated with poor outcomes in patients with TBI in several retrospective observational studies. We evaluated the relationship between prehospital intubation, functional outcomes, and mortality using high quality data on clinical practice collected prospectively during a randomized multicenter clinical trial.MethodsProTECT III was a multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of early administration of progesterone in 882 patients with acute moderate to severe nonpenetrating TBI. Patients were excluded if they had an index GCS of 3 and nonreactive pupils, those with withdrawal of life support on arrival, and if they had documented prolonged hypotension and/or hypoxia. Prehospital intubation was performed as per local clinical protocol in each participating EMS system. Models for favorable outcome and mortality included prehospital intubation, method of transport, index GCS, age, race, and ethnicity as independent variables. Significance was set at α = 0.05. Favorable outcome was defined by a stratified dichotomy of the GOS-E scores in which the definition of favorable outcome depended on the severity of the initial injury.ResultsFavorable outcome was more frequent in the 349 subjects with prehospital intubation (57.3%) than in the other 533 patients (46.0%, p = 0.003). Mortality was also lower in the prehospital intubation group (13.8% v. 19.5%, p = 0.03). Logistic regression analysis of prehospital intubation and mortality, adjusted for index GCS, showed that odds of dying for those with prehospital intubation were 47% lower than for those that were not intubated (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.36-0.78). 279 patients with prehospital intubation were transported by air. Modeling transport method and mortality, adjusted for index GCS, showed increased odds of dying in those transported by ground compared to those transported by air (OR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.40-3.15). Decreased odds of dying trended among those with prehospital intubation adjusted for transport method, index GCS score at randomization, age, and race/ethnicity (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.37-1.31).ConclusionsIn this study that excluded moribund patients, prehospital intubation was performed primarily in patients transported by air. Prehospital intubation and air medical transport together were associated with favorable outcomes and lower mortality. Prehospital intubation was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality regardless of transport method or severity of injury.

Emergency medical diseases (EMDs) are the leading cause of death worldwide. A time‐to‐death analysis is needed to accurately identify the risks and describe the pattern of an EMD because the mortality rate can peak early and then decline. Dose‐ranging Phase II clinical trials are essential for developing new therapies for EMDs. However, most dose‐finding trials do not analyze mortality as a time‐to‐event endpoint. We propose three Bayesian dose‐response time‐to‐event models for a secondary mortality analysis of a clinical trial: a two‐group (active treatment vs control) model, a three‐parameter sigmoid EMAX model, and a hierarchical EMAX model. The study also incorporates one specific active treatment as an active comparator in constructing three new models. We evaluated the performance of these six models and a very popular independent model using simulated data motivated by a randomized Phase II clinical trial focused on identifying the most effective hyperbaric oxygen dose to achieve favorable functional outcomes in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. The results show that the three‐group, EMAX, and EMAX model with an active comparator produce the smallest averaged mean squared errors and smallest mean absolute biases. We provide a new approach for time‐to‐event analysis in early‐phase dose‐ranging clinical trials for EMDs. The EMAX model with an active comparator can provide valuable insights into the mortality analysis of new EMDs or other conditions that have changing risks over time. The restricted mean survival time, a function of the model's hazards, is recommended for displaying treatment effects for EMD research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveTo examine the effectiveness of intramuscular (IM) midazolam versus intravenous (IV) lorazepam for the treatment of pediatric patients with status epilepticus (SE) in the prehospital care setting.MethodsThis multicenter clinical trial randomized patients diagnosed with SE to receive either IM midazolam or IV lorazepam administered by paramedics in the prehospital care setting. Included in this secondary analysis were only patients younger than 18 years of age. Evaluated were the associations of the treatment group (IM vs. IV) with the primary outcome, defined as seizure cessation prior to emergency department (ED) arrival, and with patient characteristics, time to important events, and adverse events. Descriptive statistics and 99% confidence intervals (CIs) were used for the analysis.ResultsOf 893 primary study subjects, 120 met criteria for this study (60 in each treatment group). There were no differences in important baseline characteristics or seizure etiologies between groups. The primary outcome was met in 41 (68.3%) and 43 (71.7%) of subjects in the IM and IV groups, respectively (risk difference [RD] -3.3%, 99% CI -24.9% to 18.2%). Similar results were noted for those younger than 11 years (RD -1.3%, 99% CI -25.7% to 23.1%). Time from initiating the treatment protocol was shorter for children who received IM midazolam, mainly due to the shorter time to administer the active treatment. Safety profiles were similar.SignificanceIM midazolam can be rapidly administered and appears to be safe and effective for the management of children with SE treated in the prehospital setting. The results must be interpreted in the context of the secondary analysis design and sample size of the study.

BackgroundTraumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. Progesterone has been shown to improve neurologic outcome in multiple experimental models and two early-phase trials involving patients with TBI.MethodsWe conducted a double-blind, multicenter clinical trial in which patients with severe, moderate-to-severe, or moderate acute TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale score of 4 to 12, on a scale from 3 to 15, with lower scores indicating a lower level of consciousness) were randomly assigned to intravenous progesterone or placebo, with the study treatment initiated within 4 hours after injury and administered for a total of 96 hours. Efficacy was defined as an increase of 10 percentage points in the proportion of patients with a favorable outcome, as determined with the use of the stratified dichotomy of the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale score at 6 months after injury. Secondary outcomes included mortality and the Disability Rating Scale score.ResultsA total of 882 of the planned sample of 1140 patients underwent randomization before the trial was stopped for futility with respect to the primary outcome. The study groups were similar with regard to baseline characteristics; the median age of the patients was 35 years, 73.7% were men, 15.2% were black, and the mean Injury Severity Score was 24.4 (on a scale from 0 to 75, with higher scores indicating greater severity). The most frequent mechanism of injury was a motor vehicle accident. There was no significant difference between the progesterone group and the placebo group in the proportion of patients with a favorable outcome (relative benefit of progesterone, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.06; P=0.35). Phlebitis or thrombophlebitis was more frequent in the progesterone group than in the placebo group (relative risk, 3.03; CI, 1.96 to 4.66). There were no significant differences in the other prespecified safety outcomes.ConclusionsThis clinical trial did not show a benefit of progesterone over placebo in the improvement of outcomes in patients with acute TBI. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and others; PROTECT III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00822900.).

Early treatment of prolonged seizures with benzodiazepines given intravenously by paramedics in the prehospital setting had been shown to be associated with improved outcomes, but the comparative efficacy and safety of an intramuscular (IM) route, which is faster and consistently achievable, was previously unknown. RAMPART (the Rapid Anticonvulsant Medication Prior to Arrival Trial) was a double-blind randomized clinical trial to determine if the efficacy of intramuscular (IM) midazolam is noninferior by a margin of 10% to that of intravenous (IV) lorazepam in patients treated by paramedics for status epilepticus (SE). In children and adults with >5 min of convulsions and who are still seizing at paramedic arrival, midazolam administered by IM autoinjector was noninferior to IV lorazepam on the primary efficacy outcome with comparable safety. Patients treated with IM midazolam were more likely to have stopped seizing at emergency department (ED) arrival, without emergency medical services (EMS) rescue therapy, and were less likely to require any hospitalization or admission to an intensive care unit. Lessons from the RAMPART study's findings and potential implications on clinical practice, on the potential role of other routes of administration, on the effect of timing of interventions, and on future clinical trials are discussed.

Benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus (established status epilepticus, ESE) is a relatively common emergency condition with several widely used treatments. There are no controlled, randomized, blinded clinical trials to compare the efficacy and tolerability of currently available treatments for ESE. The ESE treatment trial is designed to determine the most effective and/or the least effective treatment of ESE among patients older than 2 years by comparing three arms: fosphenytoin (fPHT) levetiracetam (LVT), and valproic acid (VPA). This is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, Bayesian adaptive, phase III comparative effectiveness trial. Up to 795 patients will be randomized initially 1:1:1, and response-adaptive randomization will occur after 300 patients have been recruited. Randomization will be stratified by three age groups, 2-18, 19-65, and 66 and older. The primary outcome measure is cessation of clinical seizure activity and improving mental status, without serious adverse effects or further intervention at 60 min after administration of study drug. Each subject will be followed until discharge or 30 days from enrollment. This trial will include interim analyses for early success and futility. This trial will be considered a success if the probability that a treatment is the most effective is >0.975 or the probability that a treatment is the least effective is >0.975 for any treatment. Proposed total sample size is 795, which provides 90% power to identify the most effective and/or the least effective treatment when one treatment arm has a true response rate of 65% and the true response rate is 50% in the other two arms.

BackgroundUse of alteplase improves outcome in some patients with stroke. Several types of barrier frequently prevent its use. We assessed whether a standardised, barrier-assessment, multicomponent intervention could increase alteplase use in community hospitals in Michigan, USA.MethodsIn a cluster-randomised controlled trial, we selected adult, non-specialty, acute-care community hospitals in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, USA. Eligible hospitals discharged at least 100 patients who had had a stroke per year, had less than 100 000 visits to the emergency department per year, and were not academic comprehensive stroke centres. Using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, we selected 12 matched pairs of eligible hospitals. Within pairs, the hospitals were allocated to intervention or control groups with restricted randomisation in January, 2007. Between January, 2007, and December, 2007, intervention hospitals implemented a multicomponent intervention that included qualitative and quantitative assessment of barriers to alteplase use and ways to address the findings, and provided additional support. The primary outcome was change in alteplase use in patients with stroke in emergency departments between the pre-intervention period (January, 2005, to December, 2006) and the post-intervention period (January, 2008, to January, 2010). Physicians in participating hospitals and the coordinating centre could not be masked to group assignment, but were masked to progress made in paired control hospitals. External medical reviewers who were masked to group assignment assessed outcomes. We did intention-to-treat (ITT) and target-population (without one pair that was excluded after randomisation) analyses. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00349479.FindingsAll 24 hospitals completed the study. Overall, 745 of 40 823 patients with stroke received intravenous alteplase treatment. In the ITT analysis, the proportion of patients with stroke who were admitted and treated with alteplase increased between the pre-intervention and post-intervention periods in intervention hospitals (89 [1·25%] of 7119 patients to 235 [2·79%] of 8419) to a greater extent than in control hospitals (99 [1·25%] of 7946 to 194 [2·10%] of 9222), but the difference between groups was not significant (relative risk [RR] 1·37, 95% CI 0·96-1·93; p=0·08). In the target-population analysis, the increase in alteplase use in intervention hospitals (59 [1·00%] of 5882 to 191 [2·62%] of 7288) was significantly greater than in control hospitals (65 [1·09%] of 5957 to 120 [1·72%] of 6989; RR 1·68, 95% CI 1·09-2·57; p=0·02), but was still clinically modest.InterpretationThe intervention did not significantly increase alteplase use in patients with ischaemic stroke. The increase in use of alteplase in the target population was significant, but smaller than the effect to which the study was powered. Additional strategies to increase acute stroke treatment are needed.FundingNational Institutes of Health National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.