Lliwen A. Jones, Rhys
H. Thomas. Sudden death in epilepsy:
Insights from the last 25 years. Seizure: European Journal of Epilepsy, Article in press.
Highlights
• SUDEP is the leading cause of mortality in chronic
refractory epilepsy.
• Pathophysiology remains poorly understood but risk factors
identified.
• No proven intervention for its prevention.
• Increasing awareness and research in the last 25 years.
• Several promising future research avenues to minimise
SUDEP impact.
Abstract
Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is the leading
cause of mortality in patients with refractory epilepsy, and as such has been a
major research focus over the last 25 years. The earliest SUDEP research papers
were published in Seizure, as have scores of SUDEP papers since. In this review
we discuss the efforts to try and describe the pathophysiological basis of
SUDEP, the drive to discover the clinical risk factors that increase the
likelihood of SUDEP, and the motivation to increase awareness of SUDEP. These
three areas are the prime factors that, when answered, will allow us to better
mitigate against SUDEP and help individuals monitor their personal risk. The
field has benefited from strong definitions, multinational collaboration, the
use of cutting edge genetic analysis, and ensuring that bereaved families are
able to take part in research when this is appropriate. Clearly there is much
that we do not know and yet, has any area of epilepsy research come so far in
the last 25 years?
____________________________________________________________________________
From the article:
Termed as Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy (SUDEP), this
was defined in 1997 by Nashef :
“Sudden, unexpected, witnessed or unwitnessed, non-traumatic
and non-drowning death in patients with epilepsy, with or without evidence of a
seizure and excluding documented status epilepticus, in which post-mortem
examination does not reveal a toxicologic or anatomic cause for death.”
SUDEP is the leading cause of mortality in patients with
chronic refractory epilepsy, estimated to cause 10–50% of deaths. The topic has
attracted increasing amounts of interest from both the scientific and epilepsy
community since its definition. Given the sudden and devastating nature of
SUDEP, most often affecting young people between the ages of 20 and 40, better
knowledge of its pathophysiology and associated risk factors is crucial so that
attempts at treatment and prevention can be made…
Despite vigorous efforts, the pathophysiology of SUDEP today
remains little better understood than when first described in the literature.
The publication of several SUDEP epidemiological studies, case series of
witnessed and monitored SUDEP and human and animal epilepsy research however,
have provided data from which possible SUDEP mechanisms have been proposed …
The most common proposed mechanism reported in other studies
is that of seizure-induced respiratory dysfunction. Although the majority of patients are found in
the prone position, the face is usually tilted to one side and the airway is
not completely obstructed. A case series of witnessed deaths reported that most
patients experienced breathing difficulties before death. This may be due to a
combination of obstructive and central apnoea ultimately leading to asystole. The
persistence of hypoxia and hypercapnia after respiratory effort has been
restored or increased has suggested the possibility of intrinsic pulmonary
dysfunction. The evidence remains circumstantial with post-mortem examination
showing pulmonary oedema in many SUDEP cases but not significant enough to
cause death …
Another proposed mechanism is that of seizure related
cardiac arrhythmia. There are many case reports of patients receiving cardiac
pacemakers as a result of postictal bradycardia and asystole. Genetic mutations
in ion channels have also been studied as a potential cause for SUDEP,
particularly long QT syndrome (LQTS) . A study of 61 people with SUDEP (the
majority with definite SUDEP) were studied with exome sequencing and four had
mutations in genes known to contribute to LQTS; two with KCNH2
, one KCNQ1 and a fourth with SCN5A
. A further nine had variants in candidate genes for cardiac arrhythmia;
that is to say genes coding for ion channels that may contribute to LQTS,
Brugada syndrome or catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia. An
ultra-rare variant in SCN5A has previously been identified in in a young
woman with SUDEP. It remains unclear
whether patients with LQTS and epilepsy are at increased risk of SUDEP, and
this mechanism is unlikely to be the primary cause of SUDEP in the majority of
patients.
Other proposed mechanisms include that prolonged PGES leads
to electrocerebral shutdown, leading to cardiorespiratory dysfunction. This was
proposed in the MORTEMUS study, but studies have been inconsistent in
determining the role played by PGES in SUDEP. A
study by Shen et al. explored the possibility that adenosine may play a role in
centrally-induced cardiorespiratory dysfunction, suggesting that adenosine receptor
antagonists such as caffeine may have a protective effect against SUDEP when
given at seizure onset.
The significant but non-modifiable risk factors for SUDEP
appear to be male sex, history of GTCS, younger age of onset, longer duration
of epilepsy, symptomatic aetiology, and associated learning disability. Although fixed, the knowledge of these risk
factors are useful for clinicians when counselling patients for SUDEP. More
importantly for the drive to minimise the risk of SUDEP, several modifiable
risk factors have also been identified. Consistently reported are higher
frequency of GTCS, and antiepileptic drug (AED) polytherapy , although it is
recognised that AED polytherapy may be a surrogate for seizure frequency.
Identification that the seizure frequency may increase in the months prior to a
SUDEP has implications for SUDEP surveillance and healthcare system delivery.
The majority of SUDEP cases occur at night and several studies have reported
that a lack of night-time surveillance as a risk factor for SUDEP.
Inconsistently reported is the use of lamotrigine and carbamazepine; further
research is required to establish their roles as potential SUDEP risk factors ..
There remains no effective evidence-based treatment or
prevention against SUDEP. The mainstay of management has been in addressing the
modifiable risk factors to reduce SUDEP risk. This includes promoting AED
compliance to reduce the incidence of GTCS and making patients and families
aware of the potential consequences of uncontrolled nocturnaL . The use of a
safety checklist has gained interest since it was first proposed and has
subsequently been developed in to a smart-phone app . Patient education is
important in promoting adherence to AEDs, avoiding factors that may trigger
seizures, appropriately reacting to clusters of seizures and being aware of the
interaction of other drugs with AEDs. Lattice pillows have been proposed as an
intervention to reduce the risk of airway obstruction, but there have been no
studies to evaluate their use in epilepsy. Nocturnal supervision has been found
to be protective against SUDEP in one study, possibly suggesting that nocturnal
seizure alarms may have a role in improving night-time supervision . The use of
selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), opiate receptor inhibitors,
adenosine receptor inhibitors, cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardiac
defibrillators (ICD) have also been proposed as future targets for SUDEP
prevention but there have been no trials examining the benefits of these in the
prevention of SUDEP.
Within the hospital setting, several interventions are
recommended to reduce the duration of seizures, respiratory dysfunction and EEG
suppression. These include repositioning of the patient, oral suctioning and
oxygen administration as well as prompt administration of AED if indicated. The
MORTEMUS study also showed that in near-SUDEP cases, resuscitation was prompt
whereas in the SUDEP cases it was delayed suggesting that close monitoring of
patients in hospital with the use of direct supervision, ECG, EEG and oxygen
saturations may reduce the risk of SUDEP…
Through the above, a better understanding of SUDEP may lead
to effective prevention strategies. It is chilling to recognise that most
people with epilepsy who die a SUDEP death, die alone. More research is
required particularly for the role of nocturnal supervision of epilepsy
patients, as though it is currently suggested in the literature that
supervision is protective, to routinely advise this could have a deleterious
effect on the quality of life of epilepsy patients and should not be undertaken
lightly without substantive evidence for its recommendation. Nocturnal seizure
alarms appear to be a promising alternative and these warrant further research
to determine whether offer any protection against SUDEP. Further research is
also required to determine the effectiveness of SSRIs, opiate and adenosine
receptor inhibitors, cardiac pacemakers and ICDs in the prevention of SUDEP. We
hope that reducing the treatment gap and ensuring the highest quality epilepsy
care for everyone may reduce SUDEP rates; already there is evidence that
successful epilepsy surgery reduces mortality, in part, by lowering SUDEP rates
.
No comments:
Post a Comment