-
European Journal of Emergency Medicine... Aug 2022Atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response (Afib/RVR) is a frequent reason for emergency department (ED) visits and can be treated with a variety of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response (Afib/RVR) is a frequent reason for emergency department (ED) visits and can be treated with a variety of pharmacological agents. Magnesium sulfate has been used to prevent and treat postoperative Afib/RVR. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of magnesium for treatment of Afib/RVR in the ED. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched up to June 2021 to identify any relevant randomized trials or observational studies. We used Cochrane's Risk-of-Bias tools to assess study qualities and random-effects meta-analysis for the difference of heart rate (HR) before and after treatment. Our search identified 395 studies; after reviewing 11 full texts, we included five randomized trials in our analysis. There were 815 patients with Afib/RVR; 487 patients (60%) received magnesium treatment, whereas 328 (40%) patients received control treatment. Magnesium treatment was associated with significant reduction in HR [standardized mean difference (SMD), 0.34; 95% CI, 0.21-0.47; P < 0.001; I2 = 4%), but not associated with higher rates of sinus conversion (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 0.726-2.94; P = 0.29), nor higher rates of hypotension and bradycardia (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 0.62-8.09; P = 0.22). Meta-regressions demonstrated that higher maintenance dose (corr. coeff, 0.17; P = 0.01) was positively correlated with HR reductions, respectively. We observed that magnesium infusion can be an effective rate control treatment for patients who presented to the ED with Afib/RVR. Further studies with more standardized forms of control and magnesium dosages are necessary to assess the benefit/risk ratio of magnesium treatment, besides to confirm our observations.
Topics: Atrial Fibrillation; Emergency Service, Hospital; Heart Rate; Humans; Magnesium; Magnesium Sulfate
PubMed: 35503562
DOI: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000941 -
Health Technology Assessment... Mar 2022Convulsive status epilepticus is defined as ≥ 5 minutes of either continuous seizure activity or repetitive seizures without regaining consciousness. It is regarded...
BACKGROUND
Convulsive status epilepticus is defined as ≥ 5 minutes of either continuous seizure activity or repetitive seizures without regaining consciousness. It is regarded as an emergency condition that requires prompt treatment to avoid hospitalisation and to reduce morbidity and mortality. Rapid pre-hospital first-line treatment of convulsive status epilepticus is currently benzodiazepines, administered either by trained caregivers in the community (e.g. buccal midazolam, rectal diazepam) or by trained health professionals via intramuscular or intravenous routes (e.g. midazolam, lorazepam). There is a lack of clarity about the optimal treatment for convulsive status epilepticus in the pre-hospital setting.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the current evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treatments for adults with convulsive status epilepticus in the pre-hospital setting.
DATA SOURCES
We searched major electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, CENTRAL, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Health Technology Assessment Database, Research Papers in Economics, and the ISPOR Scientific Presentations Database, with no restrictions on publication date or language of publication. Final searches were carried out on 21 July 2020.
REVIEW METHODS
Systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing adults with convulsive status epilepticus who received treatment before or on arrival at the emergency department. Eligible treatments were any antiepileptic drugs offered as first-line treatments, regardless of their route of administration. Primary outcomes were seizure cessation, seizure recurrence and adverse events. Two reviewers independently screened all citations identified by the search strategy, retrieved full-text articles, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included trials. Results were described narratively.
RESULTS
Four trials (1345 randomised participants, of whom 1234 were adults) assessed the intravenous or intramuscular use of benzodiazepines or other antiepileptic drugs for the pre-hospital treatment of convulsive status epilepticus in adults. Three trials at a low risk of bias showed that benzodiazepines were effective in stopping seizures. In particular, intramuscular midazolam was non-inferior to intravenous lorazepam. The addition of levetiracetam to clonazepam did not show clear advantages over clonazepam alone. One trial at a high risk of bias showed that phenobarbital plus optional phenytoin was more effective in terminating seizures than diazepam plus phenytoin. The median time to seizure cessation from drug administration varied from 1.6 minutes to 15 minutes. The proportion of people with recurrence of seizures ranged from 10.4% to 19.1% in two trials reporting this outcome. Across trials, the rates of respiratory depression among participants receiving active treatments were generally low (from 6.4% to 10.6%). The mortality rate ranged from 2% to 7.6% in active treatment groups and from 6.2% to 15.5% in control groups. Only one study based on retrospective observational data met the criteria for economic evaluation; therefore, it was not possible to draw any robust conclusions on cost-effectiveness.
LIMITATIONS
The limited number of identified trials and their differences in terms of treatment comparisons and outcomes hindered any meaningful pooling of data. None of the included trials was conducted in the UK and none assessed the use of buccal midazolam or rectal diazepam. The review of economic evaluations was hampered by lack of suitable data.
CONCLUSIONS
Both intravenous lorazepam and intravenous diazepam administered by paramedics are more effective than a placebo in the treatments of adults with convulsive status epilepticus, and intramuscular midazolam is non-inferior to intravenous lorazepam. Large well-designed clinical trials are needed to establish which benzodiazepines are more effective and preferable in the pre-hospital setting.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020201953.
FUNDING
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 26, No. 20. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Emergency Service, Hospital; Hospitals; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Status Epilepticus
PubMed: 35333156
DOI: 10.3310/RSVK2062 -
Epileptic Disorders : International... Dec 2022We carried out a systematic review of published information on transfer of antiseizure medications (ASMs) into breastmilk, ASM serum concentrations in breastfed infants,...
We carried out a systematic review of published information on transfer of antiseizure medications (ASMs) into breastmilk, ASM serum concentrations in breastfed infants, and the wellbeing of infants breastfed by mothers on ASM treatment. Information was extracted from 85 relevant articles. No data on ASM levels in breastmilk or in breastfed infants was identified for cannabidiol, cenobamate, clobazam, eslicarbazepine-acetate, everolimus, felbamate, fenfluramine, retigabine, rufinamide, stiripentol, tiagabine, and vigabatrin. For ASMs, with available information on levels in breastfed infants, very low concentrations (in the order of 10% or less of maternal serum concentrations) were reported for carbamazepine, gabapentin, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, phenytoin, valproate, and clonazepam. Slightly higher levels (up to approximately 30% of maternal serum concentrations) have been observed with lamotrigine and topiramate, and in single case reports for brivaracetam, lacosamide, and perampanel. High infant levels (30% up to 100% of maternal serum concentrations) have been reported with ethosuximide, phenobarbital and zonisamide. Adverse infant effects during breastfeeding by mothers on ASMs appear to be rare regardless of the type of ASM, but systematic study is limited. Prospective long-term follow-up studies of developmental outcomes among children who have been breastfed by mothers taking ASMs are sparse and have mainly involved children whose mothers were taking carbamazepine, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, phenytoin or valproate as monotherapy while breastfeeding. Although these studies have not indicated poorer outcome among breastfed children compared with those who were not breastfed, further data on long-term outcomes are needed to draw firm conclusions. It is concluded that breastfeeding should in general be encouraged in women taking ASMs, given the well-established benefits of breastfeeding with regard to both short- and long-term infant health in the general population. Counselling needs to be individualized including information on the current knowledge regarding the woman's specific ASM treatment.
Topics: Breast Feeding; Cannabidiol; Carbamazepine; Child; Clobazam; Clonazepam; Epilepsy; Ethosuximide; Everolimus; Felbamate; Female; Fenfluramine; Gabapentin; Humans; Infant; Lacosamide; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Oxcarbazepine; Phenobarbital; Phenytoin; Prospective Studies; Tiagabine; Topiramate; Valproic Acid; Vigabatrin; Zonisamide
PubMed: 36193017
DOI: 10.1684/epd.2022.1492 -
International Clinical... Jul 2023The whole picture of psychotropics for bipolar depression (BPD) remains unclear. This review compares the differences in efficacy and safety profiles among common...
The whole picture of psychotropics for bipolar depression (BPD) remains unclear. This review compares the differences in efficacy and safety profiles among common psychotropics for BPD. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched for proper studies. The changes in the depressive rating scale, remission/response rates, nervous system adverse events (NSAEs), gastrointestinal adverse events (GIAEs), metabolic parameters, and prolactin were compared between medication and placebo or among medications with the Cohen's d or number needed to treat/harm. The search provided 10 psychotropics for comparison. Atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) were superior to lithium and lamotrigine at alleviating acute depressive symptoms. Lithium was more likely to induce dry mouth and nausea. Cariprazine and aripiprazole seemed to be associated with an increased risk of akathisia and upper GIAEs. Lurasidone was associated with an increased risk of developing akathisia and hyperprolactinemia. Olanzapine, olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (OFC), and quetiapine were associated with an increased risk of NSAEs, metabolic risk, dry mouth, and constipation. Cariprazine, lurasidone, OFC, or quetiapine was optimal monotherapy for BPD. Further studies are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of lamotrigine for treating BPD. Adverse events varied widely across different drug types due to variations in psychopharmacological mechanisms, dosages, titration, and ethnicities.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Bipolar Disorder; Lurasidone Hydrochloride; Quetiapine Fumarate; Lamotrigine; Lithium; Psychomotor Agitation; Antimanic Agents
PubMed: 36947416
DOI: 10.1097/YIC.0000000000000449 -
Neurocritical Care Jun 2024There is practice heterogeneity in the use, type, and duration of prophylactic antiseizure medications (ASMs) in patients with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Guidelines for Seizure Prophylaxis in Adults Hospitalized with Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Clinical Practice Guideline for Health Care Professionals from the Neurocritical Care Society.
BACKGROUND
There is practice heterogeneity in the use, type, and duration of prophylactic antiseizure medications (ASMs) in patients with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of articles assessing ASM prophylaxis in adults with moderate-severe TBI (acute radiographic findings and requiring hospitalization). The population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) questions were as follows: (1) Should ASM versus no ASM be used in patients with moderate-severe TBI and no history of clinical or electrographic seizures? (2) If an ASM is used, should levetiracetam (LEV) or phenytoin/fosphenytoin (PHT/fPHT) be preferentially used? (3) If an ASM is used, should a long versus short (> 7 vs. ≤ 7 days) duration of prophylaxis be used? The main outcomes were early seizure, late seizure, adverse events, mortality, and functional outcomes. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to generate recommendations.
RESULTS
The initial literature search yielded 1998 articles, of which 33 formed the basis of the recommendations: PICO 1: We did not detect any significant positive or negative effect of ASM compared to no ASM on the outcomes of early seizure, late seizure, adverse events, or mortality. PICO 2: We did not detect any significant positive or negative effect of PHT/fPHT compared to LEV for early seizures or mortality, though point estimates suggest fewer late seizures and fewer adverse events with LEV. PICO 3: There were no significant differences in early or late seizures with longer versus shorter ASM use, though cognitive outcomes and adverse events appear worse with protracted use.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on GRADE criteria, we suggest that ASM or no ASM may be used in patients hospitalized with moderate-severe TBI (weak recommendation, low quality of evidence). If used, we suggest LEV over PHT/fPHT (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence) for a short duration (≤ 7 days, weak recommendation, low quality of evidence).
Topics: Humans; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Anticonvulsants; Seizures; Levetiracetam; Critical Care; Adult; Phenytoin; Hospitalization; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 38316735
DOI: 10.1007/s12028-023-01907-x -
Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue... Apr 2020
Topics: Bipolar Disorder; Cannabidiol; Cannabinoid Receptor Modulators; Humans; Mood Disorders
PubMed: 31830820
DOI: 10.1177/0706743719895195 -
Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing :... Dec 2022Nonopioid analgesics are commonly used to augment or replace opioids in the perioperative setting. Perianesthesia nurses must consider timing and appropriateness when... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Nonopioid analgesics are commonly used to augment or replace opioids in the perioperative setting. Perianesthesia nurses must consider timing and appropriateness when administering these medications to patients in the preoperative area or the postanesthesia care unit, particularly when other medications with sedative effects are being given. Gabapentin, originally proposed as an anticonvulsant medication, promotes analgesia and reduces risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting. This review examines the effect of gabapentin on postoperative pain.
DESIGN
A systematic review.
METHODS
CINAHL, PubMed, and Cochrane Review databases were searched to find a total of 93 sources that examined gabapentin and postoperative pain. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, four randomized controlled trials (RCT) were reviewed. Postoperative pain within the 24 hours of surgery was measured as the primary outcome using the visual analog scale in all sources FINDINGS: Three of the four reviewed RCTs determined gabapentin was both statistically and clinically significant in reducing postoperative pain, and all four sources showed a reduction in opioid consumption during the immediate postoperative period, which promoted patient satisfaction.
CONCLUSIONS
Further study of gabapentin and postoperative pain is needed employing rigorous and robust methodology and diversity of the sample selections.
Topics: Humans; Gabapentin; Analgesics, Opioid; Analgesics; Pain, Postoperative; Anesthesia
PubMed: 36100525
DOI: 10.1016/j.jopan.2022.04.008 -
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 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Dec 2022Cannabidiol's (CBD) safety profile and broad action has made it a popular treatment option for anxiety and co-occurring sleep disturbance. However, its efficacy in... (Review)
Review
Cannabidiol's (CBD) safety profile and broad action has made it a popular treatment option for anxiety and co-occurring sleep disturbance. However, its efficacy in healthy and clinical populations, treatment duration, formulation and doses for optimal therapeutic benefits remains unclear. Selected databases were examined from inception to October 2022. Study selection, data extraction and Cochrane Risk of Bias assessments were conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42021247476) with 58 full-text studies meeting the eligibility criteria and administered CBD only or with Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) across healthy and clinical populations. In healthy populations and certain non-cannabis using clinical populations, CBD had greater anxiolytic effects without prominent effects on sleep. An inverted U-shaped dose relationship, and CBD ratio to THC in combined treatments likely moderated these effects. Mechanistically, observed CBD effects occurred via primary modulation of the endocannabinoid system and secondary regulation of neuroendocrine function. Additional research is needed to understand CBD mechanisms of action across diverse groups.
Topics: Humans; Cannabinoids; Dronabinol; Cannabidiol; Anxiety; Sleep Wake Disorders; Sleep
PubMed: 36370842
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104941 -
Journal of Internal Medicine Jun 2023Findings of liver enzyme elevations in recent cannabidiol studies have raised concerns over liver safety. This study aimed to determine the association between... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Findings of liver enzyme elevations in recent cannabidiol studies have raised concerns over liver safety. This study aimed to determine the association between cannabidiol use, liver enzyme elevation, and drug-induced liver injury (DILI).
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a search of EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, Medline, medRxiv, and Web of Science of records up to February 2022 was conducted. Clinical trials initiating daily cannabidiol treatment with serial liver enzyme measures were included. The proportion of liver enzyme elevations and DILI were independently extracted from published reports. Pooled proportions and probability meta-analyses were conducted.
RESULTS
Cannabidiol use was associated with an increased probability of liver enzyme elevation (N = 12 trials, n = 1229; OR = 5.85 95% CI = 3.84-8.92, p < 0.001) and DILI (N = 12 trials, n = 1229; OR = 4.82 95% CI = 2.46-9.45, p < 0.001) compared to placebo controls. In participants taking cannabidiol (N = 28 trials, n = 1533), the pooled proportion of liver enzyme elevations was 0.074 (95% CI 0.0448-0.1212), and DILI was 0.0296 (95% CI 0.0136-0.0631). High-dose CBD (≥1000 mg/day or ≥20 mg/kg/day) and concomitant antiepileptic drug use were identified as risk factors. No cases were reported in adults using cannabidiol doses <300 mg/day. No cases of severe DILI were reported.
CONCLUSIONS
Cannabidiol-associated liver enzyme elevations and DILI meet the criteria of common adverse drug events. Clinicians are encouraged to screen for cannabidiol use and monitor liver function in patients at increased risk.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Cannabidiol; Liver
PubMed: 36912195
DOI: 10.1111/joim.13627