A group of clinicians from across Europe experienced in the use of botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of spasticity following acquired brain injury gathered to develop a consensus statement on best practice in managing adults with spasticity. This consensus table summarizes the current published data, which was collated following extensive literature searches, their assessment for level of evidence and discussion among the whole group. Published information is supplemented by expert opinion based on clinical experience from 16 European countries, involving 28 clinicians, who treat an average of approximately 200 patients annually, representing many thousand spasticity treatments with botulinum toxin per year.

No abstract

Objective:To evaluate safety (primary objective) and efficacy of increasing doses (400 U up to 800 U) of incobotulinumtoxinA (Xeomin, Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH) for patients with limb spasticity.Methods:In this prospective, single-arm, dose-titration study (NCT01603459), patients (18–80 years) with spasticity due to cerebral causes, who were clinically deemed to require total doses of 800 U incobotulinumtoxinA, received 3 consecutive injection cycles (ICs) with 400 U, 600 U, and 600–800 U incobotulinumtoxinA, respectively, each followed by 12–16 weeks' observation. Outcomes included adverse events (AEs), antibody testing, Resistance to Passive Movement Scale (REPAS; based on the Ashworth Scale), and Goal Attainment Scale.Results:In total, 155 patients were enrolled. IncobotulinumtoxinA dose escalation did not lead to an increased incidence of treatment-related AEs (IC1: 4.5%; IC2: 5.3%; IC3: 2.9%). No treatment-related serious AEs occurred. The most frequent AEs overall were falls (7.7%), nasopharyngitis, arthralgia, and diarrhea (6.5% each). Five patients (3.2%) discontinued due to AEs. No patient developed secondary nonresponse due to neutralizing antibodies. Mean (SD) REPAS score improvements from each injection to 4 weeks postinjection increased throughout the study (IC1: −4.6 [3.9]; IC2: −5.9 [4.2]; IC3: −7.1 [4.8]; p < 0.0001 for all). The proportion of patients achieving ≥3 (of 4) treatment goals also increased (IC1: 25.2%; IC2: 50.7%; IC3: 68.6%).Conclusion:Escalating incobotulinumtoxinA doses (400 U up to 800 U) did not compromise safety or tolerability, enabled treatment in a greater number of muscles/spasticity patterns, and was associated with increased treatment efficacy, improved muscle tone, and goal attainment.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:NCT01603459.Classification of evidence:This study provides Class IV evidence that, for patients with limb spasticity, escalating incobotulinumtoxinA doses (400 U up to 800 U) increases treatment efficacy without compromising safety or tolerability.

In addition to changes in spatio-temporal and kinematic parameters, patients with stroke exhibit fear of falling as well as fatigability during gait. These changes could compromise interpretation of data from gait analysis. The aim of this study was to determine if the gait of hemiplegic patients changes significantly over successive gait trials. Forty two stroke patients and twenty healthy subjects performed 9 gait trials during a gait analysis session. The mean and variability of spatio-temporal and kinematic joint parameters were analyzed during 3 groups of consecutive gait trials (1–3, 4–6 and 7–9). Principal component analysis was used to reduce the number of variables from the joint kinematic waveforms and to identify the parts of the gait cycle which changed during the gait analysis session. The results showed that i) spontaneous gait velocity and the other spatio-temporal parameters significantly increased, and ii) gait variability decreased, over the last 6 gait trials compared to the first 3, for hemiplegic patients but not healthy subjects. Principal component analysis revealed changes in the sagittal waveforms of the hip, knee and ankle for hemiplegic patients after the first 3 gait trials. These results suggest that at the beginning of the gait analysis session, stroke patients exhibited phase of adaptation,characterized by a “cautious gait” but no fatigue was observed.

Despite the available range of non-pharmacological interventions for spasticity, there is lack of high-quality evidence for many modalities. Further research is needed to judge the effect with appropriate study designs, timing and intensity of modalities, and associate costs of these interventions.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract