Pediatric Status EpilepticusPhase 3NCT03650270
Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus Management In A Resource Limited Setting
A Phase 3 study testing Phenobarbital in people with Pediatric Status Epilepticus, run by University of Cape Town at 1 site in South Africa.
Trial summary
Convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) is a potentially devastating condition which can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Studies addressing status epilepticus in children are rare and there is a paucity of large randomised controlled trials in children looking at forms of drug treatment for SE. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 1 month to 15 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Pediatric Status Epilepticus
- What is being tested?
- Phenobarbital
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 198 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSouth Africa
- Study dates
- 1 Mar 2015to 1 Mar 2018
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 1 month to 15 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Children in convulsive status epilepticus (as defined by Trinka et al 2015)
Who cannot join
- Children not in convulsive status epilepticus
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
South Africa1 site
Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital
Cape Town, Western Cape, 7700
About this study
Official title: Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus - In Search Of Optimal Drug Management In A Resource Limited Setting
Convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) is a potentially devastating condition which can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Studies addressing status epilepticus in children are rare and there is a paucity of large randomised controlled trials in children looking at forms of drug treatment for SE. There is consistency worldwide in guidelines for first line treatment of CSE with benzodiazepines, with slight variations in type and route of administration of agents. Second line therapy usually entails phenobarbital or phenytoin parenterally. Both repeated phenobarbital loading doses and midazolam infusions have been shown to be effective and safe in the management of established convulsive SE, but there are no prospective randomized controlled trials comparing the two in children.
Our study has been undertaken to review 2 existing, and routinely used, interventions for children presenting to our center with acute convulsive seizures. In order to permit comparable data to be collected we are randomly allocating these standard interventions prospectively. This is in order to compare the efficacy and safety of two treatment protocols (phenobarbital vs phenytoin and midazolam) both of which as stated are already part of existing standard protocols internationally and in South Africa. Parenteral phenobarbital is a safe, affordable and easy to use drug in the management of status epilepticus especially for poorly resourced communities where undertaking infusions may be unsafe, time consuming or unavailable.
We hypothesize that repeated phenobarbital loading is as effective and safe, or more so, than phenytoin followed by midazolam infusion in the management of established and refractory childhood convulsive SE. If proven, then the former would be a viable option for all health care workers with access to intravenous routes (including Day hospitals) where infusions are unsafe, time consuming or unavailable.
Read the detailed description
This prospective study was conducted at the Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital (RCWMCH) and recruitment ran from between March 2015 to March 2018. All patients presenting with convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) who presented to the medical emergency unit at RCWMCH and needed therapeutic intervention were entered into the study by the attending medical staff. Study data was collected using REDCap hosted by the University of Cape Town's eResearch Centre and the study was approved by the UCT Human Research Ethics Council (UCT HREC 297/2005).
Definitions The definition of CSE was defined as any convulsive seizure that lasted longer than five minutes or multiple discrete seizures between which there is no extended period of recovery between events (Trinka et al., 2015). The onset of CSE was defined as the time provided by the caregiver who accompanied the child. The time to admission and to treatment were recorded by the staff in the unit. If children were admitted multiple times, each admission was captured independently, but only data from the first admission was included in this report . The full diagnosis of CSE was described using the multiaxial classification system. However, as it was not possible to perform EEG on all patients, this axes was excluded. Febrile status epilepticus was defined .
Treatment protocols Upon entry into the study, children were randomly allocated to one of two protocols . Both these protocols are well-established treatment protocols used in the sub-Saharan African setting for the management of SE . Randomization of protocols was performed using a free online platform (Research Randomizer ©). Both protocols began with children receiving first-line benzodiazepines (either midazolam, lorazepam or diazepam) which were either administered intravenously (IV), per rectally, intranasally or sublingually. If the children did not respond to single dose of benzodiazepines, they were given a second dose 5-10 minutes after the first dose. Pre-hospital administration of benzodiazepines by emergency services were counted if administered intravenously. However, all other routes of administration were not counted due to the lack of consistency in their administration.
If CSE continued after two doses of benzodiazepines, children were then randomized to second-line agents according to the protocol allocated to them. The one protocol, termed 'Phenobarbital' (PHB), instructed the clinician to give giving an IV bolus of phenobarbital (20mg/kg ). If CSE did not terminate after 5 - 10 minutes, a second dose was given at half the dosage (10mg/kg) and a third dose (10mg/kg) was given if CSE persisted 5-10 minutes after that.
In the second protocol, termed 'Phenytoin / Midazolam infusion' (PHY/MDZ), children were given a dose (20mg/kg) of IV phenytoin mixed with 50mL of normal saline solution and administered over 30 minutes . If the patient was still in CSE 5-10 minutes after the phenytoin was given, they were then started on a midazolam infusion. This included a loading dose of IV midazolam (0.2mg/kg) followed by an infusion set at 3mg/kg into 50mL 5% dextrose water given at a rate of 1-4 mL/hour (equivalent to 1-4 mcg/kg/min ).
If a patient child did not respond to the PHB or the PHY/MDZ protocols, they were referred to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Other reasons for admission to the PICU included respiratory depression following administration of the second-line agent, need for inotropic support, etiology-related concerns requiring intensive monitoring (e.g. severe electrolyte imbalances) and or prolonged state of a depressed level of consciousness.
Demographic data inclusive of age, sex, etiologies, pre-existing medications, previous medical conditions and co-morbidities were recorded.
Outcome measures In comparing the two treatment protocols, we will only focused on the short-term outcomes of the children in each treatment protocol. These include how the agents affected the children's physiology, admission to PICU, whether subsequent breakthrough seizures occurred and days admitted to hospital. In measuring the effects on the children's physiology, their we will calculate heart rate, respiratory rate and mean arterial pressure from during CSE to immediately post-ictal period. This will be done by subtracting the first measurement as the child presented to the unit from the first measurement taken immediately after the child had stopped convulsing.
Data analysis During the analysis, the investigator performing the analysis was blinded to which protocol the patients children were allocated to. Group allocations will only be unblinded after statistical analysis is completed and verified by an external party. Data will analysed using SPSS Statistics (IBM Corp. Released 2016, Version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). Statistical measurements will be performed using both SPSS Statistics and GraphPad Prism version 6.0 (GraphPad Software, USA). For continuous data normality will be established using the Shapiro-Wilk test and thereafter parametric (i.e. paired or unpaired student's t-tests) or nonparametric tests (i.e. Mann-Whitney U test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test) will be performed. Normally distributed data will be reported as mean standard deviation. Data that is not normally distributed will be reported as median with the interquartile range (IQR). Categorical data will be summarized in contingency tables with differences between groups being identified using the Fisher-exact or chi-squared (X2) tests and associations calculated using odds ratios (OR). Significance will be defined as a p < 0.05.
- Conditions
- Pediatric Status Epilepticus
- Being tested
- Phenobarbital
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PhenobarbitalDrug
Also called Phenytoin, Midazolam
Three repeated doses of pareneteral phenobarbital was compared to a single parenteral infusion of phenytoin followed by an infusion of parenteral midazolam
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Phenobarbital | Experimental | If allocated to this arm 'Phenobarbital' (PHB group), the clinician gives an IV bolus of phenobarbital (20mg/kg ). If CSE did not terminate after 5 - 10 minutes, a second dose is given at half the dosage (10mg/kg) and a third dose (10mg/kg) is given if CSE persists 5-10 minutes after that. Receives: Drug: Phenobarbital |
| Phenytoin / Midazolam infusion | Active comparator | In the 'Phenytoin / Midazolam infusion' (PHY/MDZ group), children are given a dose (20mg/kg) of IV phenytoin mixed with 50mL of normal saline solution and administered over 30 minutes . If the child is still in CSE 5-10 minutes after the phenytoin is given, they then start on a midazolam infusion. This includes a loading dose of IV midazolam (0.2mg/kg) followed by an infusion set at 3mg/kg into 50mL 5% dextrose water given at a rate of 1-4 mL/hour (equivalent to 1-4 mcg/kg/min ). Receives: Drug: Phenobarbital |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Differences in anticonvulsant efficacy between different second-line anticonvulsant treatment protocols
Assessing the time taken to reach seizure arrest after second-line agents given
Measured: Up to 24 hours from the time the patient was admitted.
Secondary outcomes (3)
Differences in how patients tolerate each of the two second-line anticonvulsant treatment protocols
Assessing differences physiological response to second-line anticonvulsant protocols
Measured: Up to 24 hours from the time the patient was admitted.
Differences in need for pediatric intensive care between the two second-line anticonvulsant protocols
Assessing differences in proportion of patients who received second-line anticonvulsant therapy and then require admission to the pediatric intensive care unit
Measured: Up to 24 hours from the time the patient was admitted.
Differences in admission time between patients who receive on of the two second-line anticonvulsant protocols
Assessing differences in the number of days the patient is admitted following admission
Measured: For the full duration the patient is admitted, which on average is up to one full week (seven days).
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted28 Aug 2018
- Study start1 Mar 2015
- Primary completion1 Mar 2018
- Study completion1 Mar 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pediatric Status EpilepticusStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- random allocation to 2 study protocols
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 198 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Cape Town
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Jo M Wilmshurst, University of Cape Town
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03650270
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 297/2005
- Status last verified
- Aug 2018
- First submitted
- 17 Aug 2018
- Last updated
- 28 Aug 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided: We are exploring what data would of use
Publications
Burman RJ, Ackermann S, Shapson-Coe A, Ndondo A, Buys H, Wilmshurst JM. A Comparison of Parenteral Phenobarbital vs. Parenteral Phenytoin as Second-Line Management for Pediatric Convulsive Status Epilepticus in a Resource-Limited Setting. Front Neurol. 2019 May 15;10:506. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2019.00506. eCollection 2019.
PubMed 31156538
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Aug 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus - In Search Of Optimal Drug Management In A Resource Limited Setting
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03650270
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 297/2005
- Conditions
- Pediatric Status Epilepticus
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 198 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Cape TownUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Mar 2015 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Mar 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Mar 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 28 Aug 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) is a potentially devastating condition which can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Studies addressing status epilepticus in children are rare and there is a paucity of large randomised controlled trials in children looking at forms of drug treatment for SE. There is consistency worldwide in guidelines for first line treatment of CSE with benzodiazepines, with slight variations in type and route of administration of agents. Second line therapy usually entails phenobarbital or phenytoin parenterally. Both repeated phenobarbital loading doses and midazolam infusions have been shown to be effective and safe in the management of established convulsive SE, but there are no prospective randomized controlled trials comparing the two in children.
Our study has been undertaken to review 2 existing, and routinely used, interventions for children presenting to our center with acute convulsive seizures. In order to permit comparable data to be collected we are randomly allocating these standard interventions prospectively. This is in order to compare the efficacy and safety of two treatment protocols (phenobarbital vs phenytoin and midazolam) both of which as stated are already part of existing standard protocols internationally and in South Africa. Parenteral phenobarbital is a safe, affordable and easy to use drug in the management of status epilepticus especially for poorly resourced communities where undertaking infusions may be unsafe, time consuming or unavailable.
We hypothesize that repeated phenobarbital loading is as effective and safe, or more so, than phenytoin followed by midazolam infusion in the management of established and refractory childhood convulsive SE. If proven, then the former would be a viable option for all health care workers with access to intravenous routes (including Day hospitals) where infusions are unsafe, time consuming or unavailable.
Detailed description
This prospective study was conducted at the Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital (RCWMCH) and recruitment ran from between March 2015 to March 2018. All patients presenting with convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) who presented to the medical emergency unit at RCWMCH and needed therapeutic intervention were entered into the study by the attending medical staff. Study data was collected using REDCap hosted by the University of Cape Town's eResearch Centre and the study was approved by the UCT Human Research Ethics Council (UCT HREC 297/2005).
Definitions The definition of CSE was defined as any convulsive seizure that lasted longer than five minutes or multiple discrete seizures between which there is no extended period of recovery between events (Trinka et al., 2015). The onset of CSE was defined as the time provided by the caregiver who accompanied the child. The time to admission and to treatment were recorded by the staff in the unit. If children were admitted multiple times, each admission was captured independently, but only data from the first admission was included in this report . The full diagnosis of CSE was described using the multiaxial classification system. However, as it was not possible to perform EEG on all patients, this axes was excluded. Febrile status epilepticus was defined .
Treatment protocols Upon entry into the study, children were randomly allocated to one of two protocols . Both these protocols are well-established treatment protocols used in the sub-Saharan African setting for the management of SE . Randomization of protocols was performed using a free online platform (Research Randomizer ©). Both protocols began with children receiving first-line benzodiazepines (either midazolam, lorazepam or diazepam) which were either administered intravenously (IV), per rectally, intranasally or sublingually. If the children did not respond to single dose of benzodiazepines, they were given a second dose 5-10 minutes after the first dose. Pre-hospital administration of benzodiazepines by emergency services were counted if administered intravenously. However, all other routes of administration were not counted due to the lack of consistency in their administration.
If CSE continued after two doses of benzodiazepines, children were then randomized to second-line agents according to the protocol allocated to them. The one protocol, termed 'Phenobarbital' (PHB), instructed the clinician to give giving an IV bolus of phenobarbital (20mg/kg ). If CSE did not terminate after 5 - 10 minutes, a second dose was given at half the dosage (10mg/kg) and a third dose (10mg/kg) was given if CSE persisted 5-10 minutes after that.
In the second protocol, termed 'Phenytoin / Midazolam infusion' (PHY/MDZ), children were given a dose (20mg/kg) of IV phenytoin mixed with 50mL of normal saline solution and administered over 30 minutes . If the patient was still in CSE 5-10 minutes after the phenytoin was given, they were then started on a midazolam infusion. This included a loading dose of IV midazolam (0.2mg/kg) followed by an infusion set at 3mg/kg into 50mL 5% dextrose water given at a rate of 1-4 mL/hour (equivalent to 1-4 mcg/kg/min ).
If a patient child did not respond to the PHB or the PHY/MDZ protocols, they were referred to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Other reasons for admission to the PICU included respiratory depression following administration of the second-line agent, need for inotropic support, etiology-related concerns requiring intensive monitoring (e.g. severe electrolyte imbalances) and or prolonged state of a depressed level of consciousness.
Demographic data inclusive of age, sex, etiologies, pre-existing medications, previous medical conditions and co-morbidities were recorded.
Outcome measures In comparing the two treatment protocols, we will only focused on the short-term outcomes of the children in each treatment protocol. These include how the agents affected the children's physiology, admission to PICU, whether subsequent breakthrough seizures occurred and days admitted to hospital. In measuring the effects on the children's physiology, their we will calculate heart rate, respiratory rate and mean arterial pressure from during CSE to immediately post-ictal period. This will be done by subtracting the first measurement as the child presented to the unit from the first measurement taken immediately after the child had stopped convulsing.
Data analysis During the analysis, the investigator performing the analysis was blinded to which protocol the patients children were allocated to. Group allocations will only be unblinded after statistical analysis is completed and verified by an external party. Data will analysed using SPSS Statistics (IBM Corp. Released 2016, Version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). Statistical measurements will be performed using both SPSS Statistics and GraphPad Prism version 6.0 (GraphPad Software, USA). For continuous data normality will be established using the Shapiro-Wilk test and thereafter parametric (i.e. paired or unpaired student's t-tests) or nonparametric tests (i.e. Mann-Whitney U test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test) will be performed. Normally distributed data will be reported as mean standard deviation. Data that is not normally distributed will be reported as median with the interquartile range (IQR). Categorical data will be summarized in contingency tables with differences between groups being identified using the Fisher-exact or chi-squared (X2) tests and associations calculated using odds ratios (OR). Significance will be defined as a p < 0.05.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- random allocation to 2 study protocols
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Phenobarbital | Experimental | Drug: PhenobarbitalIf allocated to this arm 'Phenobarbital' (PHB group), the clinician gives an IV bolus of phenobarbital (20mg/kg ). If CSE did not terminate after 5 - 10 minutes, a second dose is given at half the dosage (10mg/kg) and a third dose (10mg/kg) is given if CSE persists 5-10 minutes after that. |
| Phenytoin / Midazolam infusion | Active comparator | Drug: PhenobarbitalIn the 'Phenytoin / Midazolam infusion' (PHY/MDZ group), children are given a dose (20mg/kg) of IV phenytoin mixed with 50mL of normal saline solution and administered over 30 minutes . If the child is still in CSE 5-10 minutes after the phenytoin is given, they then start on a midazolam infusion. This includes a loading dose of IV midazolam (0.2mg/kg) followed by an infusion set at 3mg/kg into 50mL 5% dextrose water given at a rate of 1-4 mL/hour (equivalent to 1-4 mcg/kg/min ). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 1 month to 15 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Children in convulsive status epilepticus (as defined by Trinka et al 2015)
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Children not in convulsive status epilepticus
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| PhenobarbitalAlso: Phenytoin, MidazolamThree repeated doses of pareneteral phenobarbital was compared to a single parenteral infusion of phenytoin followed by an infusion of parenteral midazolam | Drug | Phenobarbital, Phenytoin / Midazolam infusion |
Primary outcome
Differences in anticonvulsant efficacy between different second-line anticonvulsant treatment protocols
Time frame: Up to 24 hours from the time the patient was admitted.
Assessing the time taken to reach seizure arrest after second-line agents given
3 secondary outcomes
Differences in how patients tolerate each of the two second-line anticonvulsant treatment protocols
Time frame: Up to 24 hours from the time the patient was admitted.
Differences in need for pediatric intensive care between the two second-line anticonvulsant protocols
Time frame: Up to 24 hours from the time the patient was admitted.
Differences in admission time between patients who receive on of the two second-line anticonvulsant protocols
Time frame: For the full duration the patient is admitted, which on average is up to one full week (seven days).
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Aug 2018.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31156538Burman RJ, Ackermann S, Shapson-Coe A, Ndondo A, Buys H, Wilmshurst JM. A Comparison of Parenteral Phenobarbital vs. Parenteral Phenytoin as Second-Line Management for Pediatric Convulsive Status Epilepticus in a Resource-Limited Setting. Front Neurol. 2019 May 15;10:506. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2019.00506. eCollection 2019.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided. We are exploring what data would of use
Related trials for Pediatric Status Epilepticus
Recruiting
Simulation Trial of Telemedical Support for Paramedics
Emergencies, Cardiopulmonary Arrest
RecruitingObservational study
Rapid-Response EEG in Children With Suspected Status Epilepticus
Status Epilepticus, Coma
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Phenobarbital in people with Pediatric Status Epilepticus, run by University of Cape Town at 1 site in South Africa.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Aug 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in South Africa. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Differences in anticonvulsant efficacy between different second-line anticonvulsant treatment protocols (time frame: Up to 24 hours from the time the patient was admitted.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03650270, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 Aug 2018.