-
The Turkish Journal of Pediatrics 2020Zinc has been reported to be low in children with febrile seizure compared to febrile cases without seizures, but results are inconsistent. A meta-analysis was performed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Zinc has been reported to be low in children with febrile seizure compared to febrile cases without seizures, but results are inconsistent. A meta-analysis was performed to systematically evaluate the serum level of zinc in febrile children aged between 6-72 months with or without seizures.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic search of databases was performed from January 2000 to January 2019. Studies comparing the serum level of zinc in febrile children with or without seizure were selected.
RESULTS
The major outcome was serum level of zinc. Random effect model was used to calculate pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 31 articles were included. Meta-analysis suggested that the serum level of zinc is lower in patients with febrile seizure versus febrile cases without seizure (SMD: -1.2, 95%CI= (-1.47, -0.93). In subgroup and sensitivity analysis no significant change was observed in pooled SMD. In meta-regression analysis sample size as a continuous variable had a significant influence on between-study variance (p= 0.02). According to cumulative analysis the difference of serum level of zinc in febrile children with or without seizure decreased with time.
CONCLUSION
This meta-result indicated a significant association of zinc deficiency with seizure in febrile children. It is suspected that decreased level of zinc may be involved in seizure occurrences and it may play a role in the pathogenesis of febrile seizure.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Fever; Humans; Infant; Malnutrition; Seizures; Seizures, Febrile; Zinc
PubMed: 32558408
DOI: 10.24953/turkjped.2020.03.001 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2023Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological diseases, affecting people of any age. Although the treatments of epilepsy are more and more diverse, the uncertainty...
BACKGROUND
Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological diseases, affecting people of any age. Although the treatments of epilepsy are more and more diverse, the uncertainty regarding efficacy and adverse events still exists, especially in the control of childhood epilepsy.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta- analysis following the Cochrane Handbook and preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Four databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library were searched. Studies reporting the use of brivaracetam monotherapy or adjuvant therapy in children (aged ≤18 years) were eligible for inclusion. Each stage of the review was conducted by two authors independently. Random-effects models were used to combine effect sizes for the estimation of efficacy and safety.
RESULTS
A total of 1884 articles were retrieved, and finally 9 articles were included, enrolling 503 children with epilepsy. The retention rate of BRV treatment was 78% (95% CI: 0.64-0.91), the responder rate (reduction of seizure frequency ≥ 50%) was 35% (95% CI: 0.24-0.47), the freedom seizure rate (no seizure) was 18% (95% CI: 0.10-0.25), and the incidence rate of any treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) was 39% (95% CI: 0.09-0.68). The most common TEAE was somnolence, which had an incidence rate of 9% (95% CI: 0.07-0.12). And the incidence rate of mental or behavioral disorders was 12% (95% CI: 0.06-0.17).
CONCLUSION
Our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that BRV seemed to be safe and effective in the treatment of childhood epilepsy.
PubMed: 37483441
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1170780 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2022Tinnitus is a symptom defined as the perception of sound in the absence of an external source. In England alone there are an estimated ¾ million general practice... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Tinnitus is a symptom defined as the perception of sound in the absence of an external source. In England alone there are an estimated ¾ million general practice consultations every year where the primary complaint is tinnitus, equating to a major burden on healthcare services. Clinical management strategies include education and advice, relaxation therapy, tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT), cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), sound enrichment using ear-level sound generators or hearing aids, and drug therapies to manage co-morbid symptoms such as insomnia, anxiety or depression. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of Ginkgo biloba for tinnitus in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL (2022, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 7 June 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults and children with acute or chronic subjective tinnitus. We included studies where the intervention involved Ginkgo biloba and this was compared to placebo, no intervention, or education and information. Concurrent use of other medication or other treatment was acceptable if used equally in each group. Where an additional intervention was used equally in both groups, we analysed this as a separate comparison. The review included all courses of Ginkgo biloba, regardless of dose regimens or formulations, and for any duration of treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were tinnitus symptom severity measured as a global score on a multi-item tinnitus questionnaire and serious adverse effects (bleeding, seizures). Our secondary outcomes were tinnitus loudness (change in subjective perception), tinnitus intrusiveness, generalised depression, generalised anxiety, health-related quality of life and other adverse effects (gastrointestinal upset, headache, allergic reaction). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included 12 studies (with a total of 1915 participants). Eleven studies compared the effects of Ginkgo biloba with placebo and one study compared the effects of Ginkgo biloba with hearing aids to hearing aids alone. All included studies were parallel-group RCTs. In general, risk of bias was high or unclear due to selection bias and poor reporting of allocation concealment and blinding of participants, personnel and outcome assessments. Due to heterogeneity in the outcomes measured and measurement methods used, only limited data pooling was possible. Ginkgo biloba versus placebo When we pooled data from two studies for the primary outcome tinnitus symptom severity, we found that Ginkgo biloba may have little to no effect (Tinnitus Handicap Inventory scores) at three to six months compared to placebo, but the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference (MD) -1.35 (scale 0 to 100), 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.26 to 5.55; 2 studies; 85 participants) (very low-certainty). Ginkgo biloba may result in little to no difference in the risk of bleeding or seizures, with no serious adverse effects reported in either group (4 studies; 1154 participants; low-certainty). For the secondary outcomes, one study found that there may be little to no difference between the effects of Ginkgo biloba and placebo on tinnitus loudness measured with audiometric loudness matching at 12 weeks, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -4.00 (scale -10 to 140 dB), 95% CI -13.33 to 5.33; 1 study; 73 participants) (very low-certainty). One study found that there may be little to no difference between the effects of Ginkgo biloba and placebo on health-related quality of life measured with the Glasgow Health Status Inventory at three months (MD -0.58 (scale 0 to 100), 95% CI -4.67 to 3.51; 1 study; 60 participants) (low-certainty). Ginkgo biloba may not increase the frequency of other adverse effects (gastrointestinal upset, headache, allergic reaction) at three months compared to placebo (risk ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.60; 4 studies; 1175 participants) (low-certainty). None of the studies reported the other secondary outcomes of tinnitus intrusiveness or changes in depressive symptoms or depression, anxiety symptoms or generalised anxiety. Gingko biloba with concurrent intervention versus concurrent intervention only One study compared Ginkgo biloba with hearing aids to hearing aids only. It assessed the mean difference in the change in Tinnitus Handicap Inventory scores and tinnitus loudness using a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) at three months. The study did not report adverse effects, tinnitus intrusiveness, changes in depressive symptoms or depression, anxiety symptoms or generalised anxiety, or health-related quality of life. This was a single, very small study (22 participants) and for all outcomes the certainty of the evidence was very low. We were unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is uncertainty about the benefits and harms of Ginkgo biloba for the treatment of tinnitus when compared to placebo. We were unable to draw meaningful conclusions regarding the benefits and harms of Ginkgo biloba when used with concurrent intervention (hearing aids). The certainty of the evidence for the reported outcomes, assessed using GRADE, ranged from low to very low. Future research into the effectiveness of Ginkgo biloba in patients with tinnitus should use rigorous methodology. Randomisation and blinding should be of the highest quality, given the subjective nature of tinnitus and the strong likelihood of a placebo response. The CONSORT statement should be used in the design and reporting of future studies. We also recommend the use of validated, patient-centred outcome measures for research in the field of tinnitus.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Ginkgo biloba; Headache; Hypersensitivity; Seizures; Tinnitus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36383762
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013514.pub2 -
The International Journal of Risk &... 2023Epilepsy is one of the most common chronic neurological disorders, affecting more than 50 million people globally. In this review we summarised the evidence from... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Epilepsy is one of the most common chronic neurological disorders, affecting more than 50 million people globally. In this review we summarised the evidence from randomised controlled trials of gabapentin used as monotherapy for the treatment of focal epilepsy, both newly diagnosed and drug-resistant, with or without secondary generalisation.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effects of gabapentin monotherapy for people with epileptic focal seizures with and without secondary generalisation.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 24 February 2020) on 25 February 2020. CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRA), and the specialised registers of Cochrane Review Groups including the Cochrane Epilepsy Group. We also searched several Russian databases, reference lists of relevant studies, ongoing trials registers, conference proceedings, and we contacted trial authors.
RESULTS
We found five randomised controlled trials (3167 participants) comparing gabapentin to other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and differing doses of gabapentin as monotherapy for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy and drug- resistant focal epilepsy with or without secondary generalisation. Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, risk of bias, and extracted data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence and present seven patient-important outcomes in the "Summary of findings" tables. The quality of evidence was very low to moderate due to poor reporting quality, poor trial design, and other risks of bias, such as selective presentation of findings and potential heavy industry input. Better quality research may change our certainty in the effect estimates. None of the included trials reported on the number of people with 50% or greater reduction in seizures and time to withdrawal (retention time) in an extractable way. Gabapentin-treated participants were more likely to withdraw from treatment for any cause (285/539) than those treated with lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate pooled together (695/1317) (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25; 3 studies, 1856 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), but not carbamazepine. Fewer people treated with gabapentin withdrew from treatment owing to adverse events (190/525) than those treated with carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate (479/1238), (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.91; 1763 participants, 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), but not lamotrigine.
CONCLUSION
Gabapentin as monotherapy probably controlled seizures no better and no worse than comparator AEDs (lamotrigine, carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, and topiramate). Compared to carbamazepine, gabapentin was probably better in retaining people in studies and preventing withdrawals due to adverse events. The most common side effects associated with gabapentin were ataxia (poor co-ordination and unsteady gait), dizziness, fatigue, and drowsiness.
Topics: Humans; Gabapentin; Oxcarbazepine; Topiramate; Epilepsy; Anticonvulsants; Epilepsies, Partial; Seizures; Lamotrigine; Carbamazepine; Drug Resistant Epilepsy
PubMed: 37393439
DOI: 10.3233/JRS-235001 -
Journal of Neurology Dec 2023There are limited data on HHV-7 meningitis and this systematic review used electronic search to gather pieces of evidence regarding its characteristics. Nine articles... (Review)
Review
There are limited data on HHV-7 meningitis and this systematic review used electronic search to gather pieces of evidence regarding its characteristics. Nine articles were included which three were case reports and the rest of the articles were retrospective studies. Altogether, 32 cases were described in the literature that 13 were females and 26 were aged less than 16 years old. The HHV-7 meningitis has been reported in any season, especially in winter. It affected both immunocompetent and immunocompromised individuals and mostly presented with fever and headache, however rash and seizure have also been documented. The CSF analysis in general showed an elevated range of cell count with lymphocytic predominance and normal to slightly elevated protein levels. Thirteen patients did not receive treatment for HHV-7 meningitis and full recovery was gained in the majority of cases after about 10 days. This review summarizes characteristics of HHV-7 meningitis in the literature, and yet epidemiological studies are needed to shed more light which eventually could be helpful for the diagnosis and management of this disease.
Topics: Female; Humans; Adolescent; Male; Herpesvirus 7, Human; Retrospective Studies; Meningitis; Seizures
PubMed: 37620518
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-023-11950-5 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2020Still circa 25% to 30% of patients with epilepsy cannot be efficiently controlled with available antiepileptic drugs so newer pharmacological treatment options have been...
Still circa 25% to 30% of patients with epilepsy cannot be efficiently controlled with available antiepileptic drugs so newer pharmacological treatment options have been continuously searched for. In this context, a group of endogenous or exogenous neurosteroids allosterically positively modulating GABA-A receptors may offer a promising approach. Among endogenous neurosteroids synthesized in the brain, allopregnanolone or allotetrahydrodeoxycorticosterone have been documented to exert anticonvulsant activity in a number of experimental models of seizures-pentylenetetrazol-, bicuculline- pilocarpine-, or 6 Hz-induced convulsions in rodents. Neurosteroids can also inhibit fully kindled seizures and some of them have been reported to counteract maximal electroshock-induced convulsions. An exogenous neurosteroid, alphaxalone, significantly elevated the threshold for maximal electroconvulsions in mice but it did not potentiate the anticonvulsive action of a number of conventional antiepileptic drugs against maximal electroshock-induced seizures. Androsterone not only elevated the threshold but significantly enhanced the protective action of carbamazepine, gabapentin and phenobarbital against maximal electroshock in mice, as well. Ganaxolone (a 3beta-methylated analog of allopregnanolone) needs special consideration for two reasons. First, it performed better than conventional antiepileptic drugs, diazepam or valproate, in suppressing convulsive and lethal effects of pentylenetetrazol in pentylenetetrazol-kindled mice. Second, ganaxolone has been evaluated in the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial in patients with intractable partial seizures, taking maximally 3 antiepileptic drugs. The initial results indicate that add-on therapy with ganaxolone resulted in reduced seizure frequency with adverse effect being mainly mild to moderate. Possibly, ganaxolone may be also considered against catamenial seizures. Some positive effects of ganaxolone as an adjuvant were also observed in children with refractory seizures and its use may also prove efficient for the management of neonatal seizures associated with hypoxic injury. Neurosteroids positively modulating GABA-A receptor complex exert anticonvulsive activity in many experimental models of seizures. Their interactions with antiepileptic drugs seem ambiguous in mice. Initial clinical data indicate that ganaxolone may provide a better seizure control in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.
Topics: Allosteric Regulation; Animals; Anticonvulsants; Epilepsy; GABA-A Receptor Agonists; Humans; Neurosteroids; Seizures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33117274
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2020.541802 -
Brain and Behavior May 2021Suicide is a major public health issue and the majority of those who attempt suicide suffer from mental disorders. Beyond psychopharmacotherapy, seizure therapies and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Suicide is a major public health issue and the majority of those who attempt suicide suffer from mental disorders. Beyond psychopharmacotherapy, seizure therapies and noninvasive brain stimulation interventions have been used to treat such patients. However, the effect of these nonpharmacological treatments on the suicidal ideation and incidence of suicidality remains unclear. Here, we aimed to provide an update on the effects of seizure therapies and noninvasive brain stimulation on suicidality.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of the literature in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Elsevier ScienceDirect, and Wiley Online Library databases using the MeSH terms "Electroconvulsive Therapy", "Magnetic Seizure Stimulation", "repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation", "transcranial Direct Current Stimulation", "Cranial Electrostimulation" and "suicide". We included studies using seizure therapies and noninvasive brain stimulation as a main intervention that evaluated suicidality, regardless of diagnosis.
RESULTS
Among 1,019 records screened, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria using either electroconvulsive therapy (n = 14), magnetic seizure therapy (n = 2), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (n = 9), or transcranial direct current stimulation (n = 1). We observed that studies reported significant results, suggesting these techniques can be effective on the suicidal dimension of mental health pathologies, but a general statement regarding their efficacy is premature due to limitations.
CONCLUSIONS
Future enquiry is necessary to address methodological limitations and evaluate the long-term efficacy of these methods both alone and in combination with pharmacotherapy and/or psychotherapy.
Topics: Brain; Humans; Seizures; Suicide; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
PubMed: 33838000
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.2144 -
Seizure Nov 2023Despite many new ASM, the rate of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) has not changed. Cenobamate (CNB) is a novel ASM for the treatment of focal-onset seizures... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Despite many new ASM, the rate of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) has not changed. Cenobamate (CNB) is a novel ASM for the treatment of focal-onset seizures in adults with high seizure freedom rates in randomized controlled trials (RCT). Although CNB appears to be effective, it is not commonly prescribed to patients with DRE, resulting in a lack of "real-world data".
METHODS
To evaluate the real-world effect of CNB and to assess the generalizability of RCT data, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Pooled proportions were calculated using a random intercept logistic regression model.
RESULTS
The analysis included seven studies with a total of 229 patients with DRE, 77.3 % of whom were adults and 91.5 % had focal-onset seizures. Seizure reduction >50 % was achieved in 68 % of patients [54.54; 79.07], with seizure freedom in 16.2 % [8.38; 28.97]. There was no difference between pediatric and adult patients. CNB was discontinued in 10 % [6.74; 14.6] of patients, mostly due to lack of efficacy (39 %) or adverse effects (AE, 43 %). AE, observed in 57.3 % [39.7; 73.2] of patients, included fatigue and vertigo. A comparison of the rates calculated in this meta-analysis to the active arm of equivalent RCTs revealed no significant difference.
CONCLUSION
CNB achieves a good treatment response in patients with DRE in real-world settings, like the effect reported in RCTs. The high heterogeneity between studies calls for studies focusing on specific DRE subpopulations.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Anticonvulsants; Carbamates; Drug Resistant Epilepsy; Seizures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37713961
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2023.09.006 -
Neurobiology of Disease Nov 2022Malformations of cortical development (MCDs) are common causes of drug-resistant epilepsy. The mechanisms underlying the associated epileptogenesis and ictogenesis... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Malformations of cortical development (MCDs) are common causes of drug-resistant epilepsy. The mechanisms underlying the associated epileptogenesis and ictogenesis remain poorly elucidated. EEG can help in understanding these mechanisms. We systematically reviewed studies reporting scalp or intracranial EEG features of MCDs to characterise interictal and seizure-onset EEG patterns across different MCD types.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies describing interictal and seizure-onset EEG patterns in MCD patients. A classification framework was implemented to group EEG features into 20 predefined patterns, comprising nine interictal (five, scalp EEG; four, intracranial EEG) and 11 seizure-onset (five, scalp EEG; six, intracranial EEG) patterns. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratios (OR) of each seizure-onset pattern being associated with specific MCD types.
RESULTS
Our search yielded 1682 studies, of which 27 comprising 936 MCD patients were included. Of the nine interictal EEG patterns, five (three, scalp EEG; two, intracranial EEG) were detected in ≥2 MCD types, while four (rhythmic epileptiform discharges type 1 and type 2 on scalp EEG; repetitive bursting spikes and sporadic spikes on intracranial EEG) were seen only in focal cortical dysplasia (FCD). Of the 11 seizure-onset patterns, eight (three, scalp EEG; five, intracranial EEG) were found in ≥2 MCD types, whereas three were observed only in FCD (suppression on scalp EEG; delta brush on intracranial EEG) or tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC; focal fast wave on scalp EEG). Among scalp EEG seizure-onset patterns, paroxysmal fast activity (OR = 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03-0.53; p = 0.024) and repetitive epileptiform discharges (OR = 0.18; 95% CI: 0.05-0.61; p = 0.036) were less likely to occur in TSC than FCD. Among intracranial EEG seizure-onset patterns, low-voltage fast activity was more likely to be detected in heterotopia (OR = 19.3; 95% CI: 6.22-60.1; p < 0.001), polymicrogyria (OR = 6.70; 95% CI: 2.25-20.0; p = 0.004) and TSC (OR = 4.27; 95% CI: 1.88-9.70; p = 0.005) than FCD.
SIGNIFICANCE
Different MCD types can share similar interictal or seizure-onset EEG patterns, reflecting common underlying biological mechanisms. However, selected EEG patterns appear to point to distinct MCD types, suggesting certain differences in their neuronal networks.
Topics: Humans; Electrocorticography; Electroencephalography; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Malformations of Cortical Development; Seizures; Tuberous Sclerosis
PubMed: 36165814
DOI: 10.1016/j.nbd.2022.105863 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Topiramate is a newer broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug (AED). Some studies have shown the benefits of topiramate in the treatment of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME).... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Topiramate is a newer broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug (AED). Some studies have shown the benefits of topiramate in the treatment of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME). However, there are no current systematic reviews to determine the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015, and last updated in 2019.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in the treatment of JME.
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) on 26 August 2021, and MEDLINE (Ovid 1946 to 26 August 2021). CRS Web includes randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Cochrane Epilepsy.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating topiramate versus placebo or other AED treatment for people with JME, with the outcomes of proportion of responders and proportion of participants experiencing adverse events (AEs).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality of the studies.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three studies with a total of 83 participants. For efficacy, a greater proportion of participants in the topiramate group had a 50% or greater reduction in primarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS), compared with participants in the placebo group (RR 4.00, 95% CI 1.08 to 14.75; 1 study, 22 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were no significant differences between topiramate and valproate for participants responding with a 50% or greater reduction in myoclonic seizures (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.15; one study, 23 participants; very-low certainty evidence) or in PGTCS (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.21; one study, 16 participants, very-low certainty evidence), or participants becoming seizure-free (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.11; one study, 27 participants; very-low certainty evidence). Concerning tolerability, we ranked AEs associated with topiramate as moderate to severe, while we ranked 59% of AEs linked to valproate as severe complaints (2 studies, 61 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Moreover, systemic toxicity scores were higher in the valproate group than the topiramate group. Overall we judged all three studies to be at high risk of attrition bias and at unclear risk of reporting bias. We judged the studies to be at low to unclear risk of bias for the remaining domains (selection bias, performance bias, detection bias and other bias). We judged the overall certainty of the evidence for the outcomes as very low using the GRADE approach.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We have found no new studies since the last version of this review was published in 2019. This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support topiramate for the treatment of people with JME. Based on the current limited available data, topiramate seems to be better tolerated than valproate, but has no clear benefits over valproate in terms of efficacy. Well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to test the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Humans; Myoclonic Epilepsy, Juvenile; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures; Topiramate; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 34817852
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010008.pub5