Nimodipine in refractory epilepsy: A placebo-controlled, add-on study

Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Nimodipine as Add-On Therapy in the Treatment of Focal Refractory Epilepsy Patients: A Pilot Study

“…Contrary to our results are those published by Larkin et al [21]. In their study the authors found that in patients treated with nimodipine for 12 weeks, the median values of seizures rate (placebo vs. nimodipine) did not vary for total (17 vs. 18), partial (14 vs. 18) and generalized tonic-clonic seizures (2 vs. 5) or seizure days (13 vs. 13) either.…”

“…By the way, our results mirror in some aspects what Larkin´s et al study found. In both investigations the retention rate was similar because the authors reported 2 non-compliant patients too, although the withdrawal by side effects was superior in their study [21] (2 vs. 1 in our research).…”

“…Larkin´s JG et al research is a double blind, prospective, controlled design but possible biased because the use of nimodipine did not take into account the body weight to calculate or recommend specific doses for patients [21]. On the other hand, our trial is an open label study.…”

“…Furthermore, our group of patients had a higher seizure frequency per month, which allowed us to evaluate response rate easier. The problem of possible methodological bias that explains the differences between the investigation and our trial are discussed in the following paragraphs [21].…”

Frequency of Non-convulsive Seizures and Non-convulsive Status Epilepticus in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Patients in Need of Controlled Ventilation and Sedation

“…Nimodipine, a Ca 2+ blocker, has been shown to reduce seizures in animals [42][43][44]. It has also been discussed as a putative additive drug in therapy resistant epilepsy [45,46]. Even though nimodipine is not recognized as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy, there are theoretical and animal experimental data suggesting that the substance may influence the occurrence of seizures [47].…”