Abstract Background: Extended-release vinpocetine is effective to control focal onset epileptic seizures with a low rate of adverse events. A clinical study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of vinpocetine as an adjuvant treatment in patients with this condition. Methods: A double-blind clinical study of parallel groups was conducted, in which 87 patients with a diagnosis of focal epilepsy treated with one to three antiepileptic drugs were recruited. Patients were randomized to receive vinpocetine (n = 41) or placebo (n = 46) adjuvant to their treatment. Patients entered the baseline phase (4 weeks), the titration phase (4 weeks) and the evaluation phase (8 weeks), maintaining stable doses of vinpocetine and their respective antiepileptic drug treatment. Results: Vinpocetine was more effective than placebo in reducing seizures at the end of the evaluation phase (p < 0.0001). Sixty-nine percent of the vinpocetine-treated patients had a 50% reduction in seizures compared to 13% of placebo-treated patients. No significant differences in the presence of adverse effects in patients treated with vinpocetine compared to those treated with placebo were observed. The most frequent adverse events observed with vinpocetine were headache (7.9%) and diplopia (5.2%). Conclusions: As an adjuvant treatment, vinpocetine (2 mg/kg/day) effectively reduced the frequency of epileptic seizures and proved to be well tolerated. Vinpocetine has a wide safety profile and well-known adverse events, which are transient and with no sequelae.

Resumen Introducción: La vinpocetina de liberación prolongada ha demostrado ser efectiva en el control de crisis de inicio focal en pacientes epilépticos con una baja frecuencia de eventos adversos. Se realizó un estudio clínico para evaluar la eficacia y tolerabilidad de la vinpocetina como tratamiento adyuvante en pacientes con este padecimiento. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio clínico, doble ciego, de grupos paralelos. Se reclutaron 87 pacientes con diagnóstico de epilepsia focal tratados con uno a tres fármacos antiepilépticos. Los pacientes se aleatorizaron para ser tratados con vinpocetina (n = 41) o placebo (n = 46) de manera adyuvante a su tratamiento, e ingresaron a la fase basal (4 semanas), a la fase de titulación (4 semanas) y a la fase de evaluación (8 semanas) conservando estables las dosis de la vinpocetina y de los fármacos antiepilépticos. Resultados: La vinpocetina fue más efectiva que el placebo en la reducción de las crisis al finalizar la fase de evaluación (p < 0.0001). El 69% de los pacientes tratados con vinpocetina presentaron una reducción mayor al 50% en las crisis en comparación con el 13% de los pacientes tratados con placebo. No se presentaron diferencias significativas en cuanto a la presencia de efectos adversos en los pacientes tratados con vinpocetina comparados con los tratados con placebo. Los eventos adversos más frecuentes observados con vinpocetina fueron cefalea (7.9%) y diplopía (5.2%). Conclusiones: Como tratamiento adyuvante, la vinpocetina (2 mg/kg/día) redujo eficazmente la frecuencia de crisis epilépticas y demostró ser bien tolerada. Presenta un amplio perfil de seguridad y eventos adversos conocidos, que son transitorios y sin secuelas.

Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo é determinar se o University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) é uma ferramenta diagnóstica útil para a caracterizar disfunção olfativa na doença de Parkinson (DP). Método: Foram incluídos 138 indivíduos não dementes assuntos PD e 175 indivíduos controle pareados por sexo. Identificação cheiro foi testada usando UPSIT. Resultados: O número médio de itens UPSIT corretamente identificados pelos controles foi de 27,52±5,88; para sujeitos com DP foi de 19,66±6,08 (p=<0,001). A sensibilidade do UPSIT foi de 79,7%, com especificidade de 68,5%, utilizando um ponto de corte de ≤25. A exatidão global para o diagnóstico de DP foi de 75,3%. Conclusão: A precisão e a especificidade do UPSIT foram menores do que o que foi relatado anteriormente. Nossos dados demonstram que 17,5% dos itens da UPSIT não foram adequadamente identificados pelos controles saudáveis. São necessárias outras pesquisas para a identificação de um teste verdadeiramente cross-cultural nessa área.

Objective: The aim of this study is to determine if the University of Pennsylvania’s Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) is an accurate diagnostic tool for olfactory dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease (PD). Method: We included 138 non-demented PD subjects and 175 control subjects matched by gender. Smell identification was tested using UPSIT. Results: The mean number of UPSIT items correctly identified by controls was 27.52±5.88; the mean score for PD subjects was 19.66±6.08 (p=<0.001). UPSIT sensitivity was 79.7% with a specificity of 68.5% using a cut-off score of ≤25. The overall accuracy for the diagnosis of PD was of 75.3%. Conclusion: UPSIT accuracy and specificity were lower than what has been previously reported. Our data demonstrates that 17.5% of items of the UPSIT were not well identified by healthy controls. Further research of the identification of a truly cross-cultural test is warranted.

Baixo peso e desnutrição são muito documentadas na doença de Parkinson (DP), enquanto que o excesso de peso tem sido menos relatado. Foi realizado um estudo transversal com 177 controles saudáveis e 177 pacientes com DP que frequentavam um centro terciário. O peso e a altura de todos os participantes foram arquivados. Uma diferença estatisticamente significativa no índice de massa corporal (IMC) foi encontrada entre controles e pacientes com DP (29,1±5,4 versus 27,2±4,7, p<0,001). No Grupo DP, dois pacientes estavam abaixo do peso, 32,7% estavam dentro do intervalo normal, 46,9% apresentavam sobrepeso e 19,2% eram obesos. Peso normal e excesso de peso foram mais prevalentes no Grupo DP (p=<0,01 e <0,001, respectivamente) em relação aos controles. Em conclusão, o sobrepeso/obesidade são comuns entre os pacientes com DP, enquanto baixo peso nessa população é quase insignificante.

Underweight and malnutrition are well documented in Parkinson's disease (PD), while overweight has been less reported. We carried out a cross-sectional study including 177 healthy controls and 177 PD patients attending a tertiary care center. We recorded weight and height for all participants. A statistically significant difference was found in body mass index (BMI) between controls and PD patients (29.1±5.4 versus 27.2±4.7, p<0.001). In the PD Group, two patients were underweight, 32.7% were within normal range, 46.9% had overweight, and 19.2% were obese. Overweight and normal weight were more prevalent in the PD Group (p=<0.01 and <0.001, respectively) when compared to controls. In conclusion, overweight/obesity are common among patients with PD, while underweight is almost negligible.