Does amantadine improve cognitive recovery in severe disorders of consciousness after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage? A double-blind placebo-controlled study

Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Citações na Scopus
0
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2024
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Dimensions
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
ELSEVIER
Autores
GATTO, Luana Antunes Maranha
JR, Zeferino Demartini
Citação
CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY, v.237, article ID 108135, 7p, 2024
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background: Severe disorders of consciousness (sDoC) are a common sequela of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhages (aSAH), and amantadine has been used to improve cognitive recovery after traumatic brain injury. Objective: This study evaluated the effect of amantadine treatment on consciousness in patients with sDoC secondary to aSAH. Methods: This double -center, randomized, prospective, cohort study included patients >= 18 years old with sDoC after aSAH from February 2020 to September 2023. Individual patient data of patients were pooled to determine the effect of amantadine, in comparison to placebo. The primary outcomes at 3 and 6 months after the ictus were evaluated using the modified Rankin scale (mRS) and Glasgow outcome scale (GOS). In addition to all -cause mortality, secondary endpoints were assessed weekly during intervention by scores on Rappaport's Disability Rating Scale (RDRS) and Coma Recovery Scale -Revised (CRSR). Results: Overall, 37 patients with sDoC and initial Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) varying between 3 and 11 were recruited and randomized to amantadine (test group, n = 20) or placebo (control group, n = 17). The average age was 59.5 years (28 to 81 year -old), 24 (65%) were women, and the mean GCS at the beginning of intervention was 7.1. Most patients evolved to vasospasm (81%), with ischemia in 73% of them. The intervention was started between 30 to 180 days after the ictus, and administered for 6 weeks, with progressively higher doses. Neither epidemiological characteristics nor considerations regarding the treatment of the aneurysm and its complications differed between both arms. Overall mortality was 10.8% (4 deaths). During the study, four patients had potential adverse drug effects: two presented seizures, one had paralytic ileus, and another evolved with tachycardia; the medication was not suspended, only the dose was not increased. At data opening, 2 were taking amantadine and 2 placebo. Conclusion: Despite some good results associated with amantadine in the literature, this study did not find statistically significant positive effects in cognitive recovery in patients with delayed post-aSAH sDoC. Further large randomized clinical trials in patients' subgroups are needed to better define its effectiveness and clarify any therapeutic window where it can be advantageous.
Palavras-chave
Intracranial aneurysm, Ruptured aneurysm, Subarachnoid hemorrhage, Coma, Consciousness Disorders, Dopamine agonists, Clinical study, Prospective studies
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/58907
Referências
  1. Akçil EF, 2018, TURK J ANAESTHESIOL, V46, P100, DOI 10.5152/TJAR.2018.20280
  2. [Anonymous], 2020, Amantadine [package insert]
  3. Avecillas-Chasín JM, 2014, ACTA NEUROCHIR, V156, P1375, DOI 10.1007/s00701-014-2077-x
  4. Claassen J, 2019, NEW ENGL J MED, V380, P2497, DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa1812757
  5. Connolly BS, 2014, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V311, P1670, DOI 10.1001/jama.2014.3654
  6. Cossu G, 2014, BRIT J NEUROSURG, V28, P187, DOI 10.3109/02688697.2013.841845
  7. Cuschieri S, 2019, SAUDI J ANAESTH, V13, P27, DOI 10.4103/sja.SJA_559_18
  8. Dilmen ÖK, 2023, TURK J ANAESTHESIOL, V51, P170, DOI 10.4274/TJAR.2023.231205
  9. Egbebike J, 2022, LANCET NEUROL, V21, P704, DOI 10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00212-5
  10. Etminan N, 2019, JAMA NEUROL, V76, P588, DOI 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.0006
  11. Formisano R, 2014, J HEAD TRAUMA REHAB, V29, P387, DOI 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000027
  12. Gagnon DJ, 2020, NEUROCRIT CARE, V33, P283, DOI 10.1007/s12028-020-00977-5
  13. Giacino JT, 2018, NEUROLOGY, V91, P450, DOI 10.1212/WNL.0000000000005926
  14. Giacino JT, 2012, NEW ENGL J MED, V366, P819, DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa1102609
  15. Hammond FM, 2018, J NEUROTRAUM, V35, P2298, DOI 10.1089/neu.2018.5767
  16. Hoh BL, 2023, STROKE, V54, pE314, DOI 10.1161/STR.0000000000000436
  17. Hughes S, 2005, BRAIN INJURY, V19, P1197, DOI 10.1080/02699050500309296
  18. Kakehi S, 2021, ANN PHARMACOTHER, V55, P1254, DOI 10.1177/1060028020983607
  19. Leclerc AM, 2021, NEUROCRIT CARE, V34, P102, DOI 10.1007/s12028-020-00986-4
  20. Lehnerer Sophie Mirabell, 2017, BMJ Case Rep, V2017, DOI 10.1136/bcr-2017-220305
  21. Ma HM, 2020, BRAIN INJURY, V34, P299, DOI 10.1080/02699052.2020.1723697
  22. McMahon MA, 2009, AM J PHYS MED REHAB, V88, P525, DOI 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181a5ade3
  23. Meythaler JM, 2002, J HEAD TRAUMA REHAB, V17, P300, DOI 10.1097/00001199-200208000-00004
  24. Nussbaum ES, 2021, BRIT J NEUROSURG, V35, P384, DOI 10.1080/02688697.2020.1859462
  25. Patrick PD, 2006, J CHILD NEUROL, V21, P879, DOI 10.1177/08830738060210100901
  26. randomizer, Research Randomizer
  27. Reynolds JC, 2013, RESUSCITATION, V84, P818, DOI 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.11.014
  28. Schnakers C, 2008, J NEUROL NEUROSUR PS, V79, DOI 10.1136/jnnp.2007.124099
  29. Schneider WN, 1999, BRAIN INJURY, V13, P863
  30. Sterkel Samantha, 2017, J Med Case Rep, V11, P40, DOI 10.1186/s13256-017-1204-8
  31. Thibaut A, 2019, LANCET NEUROL, V18, P600, DOI 10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30031-6
  32. Tsao CW, 2023, CIRCULATION, V147, pE93, DOI 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001123

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MNE