In the US, 3 rescue treatment options are approved for patients with seizure clusters (ie, acute repetitive seizures), which are intermittent increases of seizure activity. This narrative PubMed review of these 3 treatments examines newer intranasal options that are well suited for adolescent and adult patients who may desire a transition from rectal treatment. Diazepam rectal gel is indicated for patients ≥2 years, diazepam nasal spray for those ≥6 years, and midazolam nasal spray for those ≥12 years. Approvals for diazepam rectal gel and midazolam nasal spray were based on safety and efficacy comparisons with placebo. Approval for diazepam nasal spray was based on results from long-term safety and tolerability studies in addition to its comparable bioavailability to diazepam rectal gel, while also showing less interpatient variability. The safety profiles of diazepam rectal gel and nasal spray are similar, and the medications share safety, warning, and precaution labeling. Thus, patients ≥6 years could be introduced to intranasal diazepam, allowing for continuity of familiar treatment while improving access and comfort. Intranasal midazolam also has a well-characterized safety profile. A proxy for effectiveness is the number of seizure clusters that were treated with a single dose, and these differed in separate, noncomparative studies. The safety and effectiveness of diazepam nasal spray have been examined in multiple subpopulations, whereas patient/caregiver experiences with both approved intranasal formulations have been characterized. Users may prefer nasal administration because it is noninvasive and effective, and provides social advantages, comfort, ease of use, and less variability compared with rectal gel. Nasal sprays are portable and convenient for use in the community (school, work, travel), and self-administration was reported in one study, with patients as young as 11 years old self-administering diazepam nasal spray. These newer, intranasal rescue treatments for seizure clusters provide an alternative to the rectal route.

Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder in the United States, affecting approximately 1.2% of the population. Some people with epilepsy may experience seizure clusters, which are acute repetitive seizures that differ from the person\'s usual seizure pattern. Seizure clusters are unpredictable, are emotionally burdensome to patients and caregivers (including care partners), and require prompt treatment to prevent progression to serious outcomes, including status epilepticus and associated morbidity (e.g., lacerations, fractures due to falls) and mortality. Rescue medications for community use can be administered to terminate a seizure cluster, and benzodiazepines are the cornerstone of rescue treatment. Despite the effectiveness of benzodiazepines and the importance of a rapid treatment approach, as many as 80% of adult patients do not use rescue medication to treat seizure clusters. This narrative review provides an update on rescue medications used for treatment of seizure clusters, with an emphasis on clinical development and study programs for diazepam rectal gel, midazolam nasal spray, and diazepam nasal spray. Results from long-term clinical trials have shown that treatments for seizure clusters are effective. Intranasal benzodiazepines provide ease of use and patient and caregiver satisfaction in pediatric and adult patients. Adverse events attributed to acute rescue treatments have been characterized as mild to moderate, and no reports of respiratory depression have been attributed to treatment in long-term safety studies. The implementation of an acute seizure action plan to facilitate optimal use of rescue medications provides an opportunity for improved management of seizure clusters, allowing those affected to resume normal daily activities more quickly.
Some people with epilepsy who take antiseizure medications may still have seizures. These seizures might happen in clusters. Seizure clusters are emergencies that need to be treated quickly to lower the risk of status epilepticus and hospitalization. Also, these clusters can be stressful. Approved rescue medications are diazepam rectal gel, midazolam nasal spray, and diazepam nasal spray. They can all be used by family and other caregivers, and nasal sprays may be preferred in a public setting. All of these treatments can be used for adults, but each has a different age limit for children. Overall, these therapies are underused; however, all have been shown to work in stopping seizure clusters and have mild to moderate side effects. Nasal treatments offer ease of use and satisfaction for patients and caregivers (care partners). However, data for some effects and patient groups are not available for all treatments. Seizure action plans are designed to give step-by-step instructions about when and how to use rescue medication. Increased use of action plans may improve at-home treatment of seizure clusters and allow patients to perform their normal daily activities and avoid injury or hospitalizations.

To describe acute seizure treatment for the long-term care setting, emphasizing rescue (acute abortive) medications for on-site management of acute unexpected seizures and seizure clusters.
Narrative review.
People with seizures in long-term care, including group residences.
PubMed was searched using keywords that pertained to rescue medications, seizure emergencies/epilepsy, seizure action plans, and long-term care.
Seizure disorder, including epilepsy, is prevalent in long-term care residences, and rescue medications can be used for on-site treatment. Diazepam rectal gel, intranasal midazolam, and diazepam nasal spray are US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved seizure-cluster rescue medications, and intravenous diazepam and lorazepam are approved for status epilepticus. Benzodiazepines differ by formulation, route of administration, absorption, and metabolism. Intranasal formulations are easy and ideal for public use and when rectal treatment is challenging (eg, wheelchair). Intranasal, intrabuccal, and rectal formulations do not require specialized training to administer and are easier for staff at all levels of training compared with intravenous treatment. Off-label rescue medications may have anecdotal support; however, potential disadvantages include variable absorption and onset of action as well as potential risks to patients and caregivers or care partners. Delivery of intravenous-administered rescue medications is delayed by the time needed to set up and deliver the medication and is subject to dosing errors. Seizure action plans that include management of acute seizures can optimize the quality and timing of treatment, which may reduce emergency service needs and prevent progression to status epilepticus.
Seizure disorder is prevalent across all ages but is increased in older adults and in those with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Prompt intervention may reduce negative outcomes associated with acute unexpected seizures and seizure clusters. Seizure action plans that include acute seizures can improve the treatment response by detailing the necessary information for staff to provide immediate treatment.

Patients with epilepsy can experience seizure clusters (acute repetitive seizures), defined as intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity that are distinct from typical seizure patterns. There are three FDA-approved rescue medications, diazepam rectal gel, midazolam nasal spray, and diazepam nasal spray, that can be administered to abort a seizure cluster in a nonmedical, community setting. Despite their effectiveness and safety, rescue medications are underutilized, and patient/caregiver experiences and perceptions of ease of use may constitute a substantial barrier to greater utilization.
The literature on rescue medications for seizure clusters is reviewed, including the effectiveness and safety, with an emphasis on ease and timing of treatment and associated outcomes. Barriers to greater utilization of rescue medication and the role of seizure action plans are discussed.
Intranasal rescue medications are easier to use and can be administered more rapidly than other routes (rectal, intravenous). Importantly, rapid administration of intranasal rescue medications has been associated with shorter durations of seizure activity as compared with rectal/intravenous routes. Intranasal rescue medications are also easy to use and socially acceptable. These factors potentially remove or reduce barriers to use and optimize the management of seizure clusters.

Rectal drug delivery is an effective alternative to oral and parenteral treatments. This route allows for both local and systemic drug therapy. Traditional rectal dosage formulations have historically been used for localised treatments, including laxatives, hemorrhoid therapy and antipyretics. However, this form of drug dosage often feels alien and uncomfortable to a patient, encouraging refusal. The limitations of conventional solid suppositories can be overcome by creating a thermosensitive liquid suppository. Unfortunately, there are currently only a few studies describing their use in therapy. However, recent trends indicate an increase in the development of this modern therapeutic system. This review introduces a novel rectal drug delivery system with the goal of summarising recent developments in thermosensitive liquid suppositories for analgesic, anticancer, antiemetic, antihypertensive, psychiatric, antiallergic, anaesthetic, antimalarial drugs and insulin. The report also presents the impact of various types of components and their concentration on the properties of this rectal dosage form. Further research into such formulations is certainly needed in order to meet the high demand for modern, efficient rectal gelling systems. Continued research and development in this field would undoubtedly further reveal the hidden potential of rectal drug delivery systems.

Benzodiazepines such as diazepam, lorazepam and midazolam remained the mainstay of treatment for acute repetitive seizures (ARS). The immediate care for ARS should often begin at home by a caregiver. This prevents the progression of ARS to prolonged seizures or status epilepticus. For a long time and despite social objections rectal diazepam gel remained only FDA-approved rescue medication. Intranasal administration of benzodiazepines is considered attractive and safe compared with rectal, buccal and sublingual routes. Intranasal delivery offers numerous advantages such as large absorptive surface area, bypass the first-pass metabolism and good patient acceptance as it is needle free and painless. Recent clinical studies have demonstrated that diazepam nasal spray (NRL-1; Valtoco®, Neurelis Inc.,San Diego, CA, USA) showed less pharmacokinetic variability and reliable bioavailability compared with the diazepam rectal gel. Diazepam nasal spray could be considered as a suitable alternative for treating seizure emergencies outside the hospital. This review summarizes the treatment options for ARS and findings from clinical studies involving intranasal diazepam for treating seizure emergencies.

Drug delivery via the rectum is a useful alternative route of administration to the oral route for patients who cannot swallow. Traditional rectal dosage forms have been historically used for localized treatments including delivery of laxatives, treatment of hemorrhoids and for delivery of antipyretics. However, the recent trend is showing an increase in the development of novel rectal delivery systems to deliver drug directly into the systemic circulation by taking advantage of porto-systemic shunting. The present review is based on research studies carried out between years 1969-2017. Data for this review have been derived from keyword searches using Scopus and Medline databases. Novel rectal drug delivery systems including hollow-type suppositories, thermo-responsive and muco-adhesive liquid suppositories, and nanoparticulate systems incorporated into an appropriate vehicle have offered more control over delivery of drug molecules for local or systemic actions. In addition, various methods for in vitro-in vivo evaluation of rectal drug delivery systems are covered which is as important as the formulation, and must be carried out using appropriate methodology. Continuous research and development in this field of drug delivery may unleash the hidden potential of the rectal drug delivery systems.

HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) strategies have the potential to prevent millions of incident HIV infections each year. However, the efficacy of PrEP strategies has been plagued by issues of non-adherence, likely because of the difficulty in motivating otherwise healthy people to adhere to treatment regimens that require significant behavioral changes and daily discipline. An alternative approach to PrEP is to focus on strategies that fit in to normal, and even desirable, sexual behaviors, such as the use of cleansing enemas by men who have sex with men (MSM) prior to receptive anal intercourse (RAI). Here, we describe preclinical efforts toward optimizing a tenofovir (TFV)-based enema formulation for rectal PrEP. Using a murine model, we compared the plasma and tissue pharmacokinetics of TFV and various TFV prodrugs, including tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), and hexadecyloxypropyl tenofovir (CMX157), after dosing as enema formulations with varying osmolality and ion content. We observed that the enema vehicle composition played a more important role than the TFV prodrug properties in achieving rapid and therapeutically relevant tenofovir diphosphate (TFV-DP) concentrations in mouse colorectal tissue. Our results support the next steps, which are further preclinical (non-human primate) and clinical development of a hypo-osmolar TFV enema product for rectal PrEP.

This study evaluated effects of differing gel volumes on pharmacokinetics (PK). IQB4012, a gel containing the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor IQP-0528 and tenofovir (TFV), was applied to the pigtailed macaque vagina and rectum. Vaginal gel volumes (1% loading of both drugs) were 0.5 or 1.5 ml; following wash-out, 1 or 4 ml of gel were then applied rectally. Blood, vaginal, and rectal fluids were collected at 0, 2, 4, and 24 h. Vaginal and rectal tissue biopsies were collected at 4 and 24 h. There were no statistically significant differences in concentrations for either drug between gel volumes within compartments at matched time points. After vaginal gel application, median IQP-0528 concentrations were ~ 104-105 ng/g, 105-106 ng/ml, and 103-105 ng/ml in vaginal tissues, vaginal fluids, and rectal fluids, respectively (over 24 h). Median vaginal TFV concentrations were 1-2 logs lower than IQP-0528 levels at matched time points. After rectal gel application, median IQP-0528 and TFV concentrations in rectal fluids were ~ 103-105 ng/ml and ~ 102-103 ng/ml, respectively. Concentrations of both drugs sampled in rectal tissues were low (~ 101-103 ng/g). For 1 ml gel, half of sampled rectal tissues had undetectable concentrations of either drug, and over half of sampled rectal fluids had undetectable TFV concentrations. These results indicate differences in drug delivery between the vaginal and rectal compartments, and that smaller vaginal gel volumes may not significantly compromise microbicide PK and prophylactic potential. However, effects of rectal gel volume on PK for both drugs were less definitive.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate effects of altering rectal contrast volume on defecatory effort during magnetic resonance defecography (MRD).
METHODS: We assessed defecation qualitatively and quantitatively as a function of rectal distention (group A: 180 cc, n=31; group B: 120 cc, n=31). Quantitative evaluation comprised measuring rectal area on midline sagittal images pre- and post-defecation.
RESULTS: Resting rectal area was significantly higher for group A than for group B (35.2 vs. 28.3 cm(2), P<.0001). Post-defecation rectal area and change in area (pre- to post-defecation) were not significantly different. Subjective evaluation showed no significant difference.
CONCLUSIONS: Decreasing rectal gel volume from 180 to 120 cc did not compromise defecation performance during MRD.