4.5 Article

Long-term safety and effectiveness of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel infusion

期刊

BRAIN AND BEHAVIOR
卷 7, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.758

关键词

levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel infusion; motor fluctuations; nonmotor symptoms; Parkinson; safety

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) infusion has demonstrated to improve motor fluctuations. The aim of this study is to assess the long-term safety and effectiveness of LCIG infusion in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) patients with motor fluctuations and its effect in nonmotor symptoms. Methods: Adverse events (AE) and their management, clinical motor, and nonmotor aspects were assessed up to 10years. Thirty-seven patients were treated with LGIC; in three subsets of patients, specific batteries of tests were used to assess cognitive and behavior assessment for 6months, quality of sleep for 6months, and quality of life and caregiver burden for 1year. Results: There was a high number of AE, but manageable, most of mild and moderate severity. All patients experienced significant improvement in motor fluctuations with a reduction in mean daily off time of 4.87hr after 3months (n=37) to 6.25hr after 9years (n=2). Diskynesias remained stables in 28 patients (75.7%) and improved in 5 patients (13.5%). There was no neuropsychological deterioration, but an improvement in attentional functions, voluntary motor control, and semantic fluency. Quality of sleep did not worsen, and there was an improvement in the subjective parameters, although overnight polysomnography did not change. There was a significant sustained improvement of 37% in PD-Q39 after 3months and to 1year, and a significant reduction in caregiver burden of 10% after 3months. Conclusion: LCIG infusion is a safe and efficacious treatment for the control of motor fluctuations, and for improvement or nonworsening of nonmotor aspects, long-term sustained, and feasible for use in routine care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据