-
Lancet (London, England) Jul 2022Behavioural, cognitive, and pharmacological interventions can all be effective for insomnia. However, because of inadequate resources, medications are more frequently... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Behavioural, cognitive, and pharmacological interventions can all be effective for insomnia. However, because of inadequate resources, medications are more frequently used worldwide. We aimed to estimate the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for the acute and long-term treatment of adults with insomnia disorder.
METHODS
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and websites of regulatory agencies from database inception to Nov 25, 2021, to identify published and unpublished randomised controlled trials. We included studies comparing pharmacological treatments or placebo as monotherapy for the treatment of adults (≥18 year) with insomnia disorder. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the confidence in network meta-analysis (CINeMA) framework. Primary outcomes were efficacy (ie, quality of sleep measured by any self-rated scale), treatment discontinuation for any reason and due to side-effects specifically, and safety (ie, number of patients with at least one adverse event) both for acute and long-term treatment. We estimated summary standardised mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. This study is registered with Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PU4QJ.
FINDINGS
We included 170 trials (36 interventions and 47 950 participants) in the systematic review and 154 double-blind, randomised controlled trials (30 interventions and 44 089 participants) were eligible for the network meta-analysis. In terms of acute treatment, benzodiazepines, doxylamine, eszopiclone, lemborexant, seltorexant, zolpidem, and zopiclone were more efficacious than placebo (SMD range: 0·36-0·83 [CINeMA estimates of certainty: high to moderate]). Benzodiazepines, eszopiclone, zolpidem, and zopiclone were more efficacious than melatonin, ramelteon, and zaleplon (SMD 0·27-0·71 [moderate to very low]). Intermediate-acting benzodiazepines, long-acting benzodiazepines, and eszopiclone had fewer discontinuations due to any cause than ramelteon (OR 0·72 [95% CI 0·52-0·99; moderate], 0·70 [0·51-0·95; moderate] and 0·71 [0·52-0·98; moderate], respectively). Zopiclone and zolpidem caused more dropouts due to adverse events than did placebo (zopiclone: OR 2·00 [95% CI 1·28-3·13; very low]; zolpidem: 1·79 [1·25-2·50; moderate]); and zopiclone caused more dropouts than did eszopiclone (OR 1·82 [95% CI 1·01-3·33; low]), daridorexant (3·45 [1·41-8·33; low), and suvorexant (3·13 [1·47-6·67; low]). For the number of individuals with side-effects at study endpoint, benzodiazepines, eszopiclone, zolpidem, and zopiclone were worse than placebo, doxepin, seltorexant, and zaleplon (OR range 1·27-2·78 [high to very low]). For long-term treatment, eszopiclone and lemborexant were more effective than placebo (eszopiclone: SMD 0·63 [95% CI 0·36-0·90; very low]; lemborexant: 0·41 [0·04-0·78; very low]) and eszopiclone was more effective than ramelteon (0.63 [0·16-1·10; very low]) and zolpidem (0·60 [0·00-1·20; very low]). Compared with ramelteon, eszopiclone and zolpidem had a lower rate of all-cause discontinuations (eszopiclone: OR 0·43 [95% CI 0·20-0·93; very low]; zolpidem: 0·43 [0·19-0·95; very low]); however, zolpidem was associated with a higher number of dropouts due to side-effects than placebo (OR 2·00 [95% CI 1·11-3·70; very low]).
INTERPRETATION
Overall, eszopiclone and lemborexant had a favorable profile, but eszopiclone might cause substantial adverse events and safety data on lemborexant were inconclusive. Doxepin, seltorexant, and zaleplon were well tolerated, but data on efficacy and other important outcomes were scarce and do not allow firm conclusions. Many licensed drugs (including benzodiazepines, daridorexant, suvorexant, and trazodone) can be effective in the acute treatment of insomnia but are associated with poor tolerability, or information about long-term effects is not available. Melatonin, ramelteon, and non-licensed drugs did not show overall material benefits. These results should serve evidence-based clinical practice.
FUNDING
UK National Institute for Health Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.
Topics: Adult; Benzodiazepines; Doxepin; Eszopiclone; Humans; Melatonin; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Zolpidem
PubMed: 35843245
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00878-9 -
CNS & Neurological Disorders Drug... 2023Insomnia, defined as a difficulty in initiating or maintaining sleep, is a relevant medical issue. Benzodiazepines (BZDs) are commonly prescribed to treat insomnia. Two...
BACKGROUND
Insomnia, defined as a difficulty in initiating or maintaining sleep, is a relevant medical issue. Benzodiazepines (BZDs) are commonly prescribed to treat insomnia. Two phases characterize human sleep structure: sleep with Non-Rapid Eye Movement (NREM) and sleep with Rapid Eye Movement (REM). Physiological sleep includes NREM and REM phases in a continuous cycle known as "Sleep Architecture."
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review summarizes the studies that have investigated effects of BZDs on Sleep Architecture.
METHODS
The articles selection included human clinical trials (in English, Portuguese, or Spanish) only, specifically focused on BZDs effects on sleep architecture. PubMed, BVS, and Google Scholar databases were searched.
RESULTS
Findings on BZDs effects on sleep architecture confirm an increase in stage 2 of NREM sleep and a decrease in time of stages 3 and 4 of NREM sleep with a reduction in time of REM sleep during the nocturnal sleep.
CONCLUSION
Variations in NREM and REM sleep may lead to deficits in concentration and working memory and weight gain. The increase in stage 2 of NREM sleep may lead to a subjective improvement of sleep quality with no awakenings. BZDz should be prescribed with zeal and professional judgment. These patients should be closely monitored for possible long-term side effects.
Topics: Humans; Benzodiazepines; Sleep
PubMed: 34145997
DOI: 10.2174/1871527320666210618103344 -
Journal of Psychiatric Practice Jul 2015Although benzodiazepines (BZDs) are commonly used in the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), no systematic review or meta-analysis has specifically... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Although benzodiazepines (BZDs) are commonly used in the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), no systematic review or meta-analysis has specifically examined this treatment. The goal of this study was to analyze and summarize evidence concerning the efficacy of BZDs in treating PTSD.
METHODS
The review protocol was undertaken according to the principles recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and is registered with the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, registration number CRD42014009318). Two authors independently conducted a search of all relevant articles using multiple electronic databases and independently abstracted information from studies measuring PTSD outcomes in patients using BZDs. Eighteen clinical trials and observational studies were identified, with a total of 5236 participants. Outcomes were assessed using qualitative and quantitative syntheses, including meta-analysis.
RESULTS
BZDs are ineffective for PTSD treatment and prevention, and risks associated with their use tend to outweigh potential short-term benefits. In addition to adverse effects in general populations, BZDs are associated with specific problems in patients with PTSD: worse overall severity, significantly increased risk of developing PTSD with use after recent trauma, worse psychotherapy outcomes, aggression, depression, and substance use. Potential biopsychosocial explanations for these results are proposed based on studies that have investigated BZDs, PTSD, and relevant animal models.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this systematic review suggest that BZDs should be considered relatively contraindicated for patients with PTSD or recent trauma. Evidence-based treatments for PTSD should be favored over BZDs.
Topics: Animals; Benzodiazepines; Clinical Trials as Topic; Depression; Humans; Models, Animal; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales; Risk Assessment; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Substance-Related Disorders; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26164054
DOI: 10.1097/PRA.0000000000000091 -
Phytomedicine : International Journal... Jul 2022Cancer-related insomnia is a highly prevalent complaint in cancer patients. However, there is no meta-analytic synthesis explored the efficacy of acupuncture for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cancer-related insomnia is a highly prevalent complaint in cancer patients. However, there is no meta-analytic synthesis explored the efficacy of acupuncture for cancer-related insomnia among cancer patients undergoing active cancer treatments.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to explore the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for insomnia in people diagnosed with cancer.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of existing randomized controlled trials on acupuncture in the treatment of cancer-related insomnia.
METHODS
According to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Statement, we identified and extracted the trials through November 2021 from ten databases and two trials record platforms (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Digital Journals, ClinicalTrials, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform). The quality of the trials was assessed using Jadad score and Risk of Bias (2.0). A meta-analysis was synthesized using the random-effects model if the included studies were in high methodological quality.
RESULTS
A total of 690 studies were identified, with 22 were included in the review, and 6 of them were included in the quantitative synthesis. Studies were highly heterogeneous in terms of participant characteristics and study methodologies. Most studies recruited patients diagnosed with a specific cancer type, and breast cancer patients were the subgroup most represented. The qualitative review of available evidence suggested a beneficial efficacy of acupuncture on sleep without serious adverse events in several studies (55%). The meta-analysis revealed that acupuncture produced a significant improvement in the total Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) score relative to the wait-list control among breast cancer patients undergoing active cancer treatments (MD -1.92, 95% CI -3.25 to -0.59, p = 0.005). Similar improvement of real and sham acupuncture on PSQI score change post-intervention was found (MD: -0.68, 95% CI: -2.44 to 1.07, p = 0.44). Manual acupuncture had similar effective rate as compared to estazolam immediately post-intervention (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.01, p = 0.09), and had significantly better effective rate than estazolam at 1-week post-intervention follow-up (RR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.43, p = 0.0009). All reported acupuncture related adverse events were mild or moderate in severity.
CONCLUSION
Acupuncture has great potential to be used to manage cancer-related insomnia for cancer patients or survivors. More studies with rigorous designs and larger sample size are warranted to verify the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for insomnia among people diagnosed with cancer, in particular among those with clinically significant insomnia.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021285844).
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Breast Neoplasms; China; Estazolam; Female; Humans; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders
PubMed: 35636168
DOI: 10.1016/j.phymed.2022.154160 -
JAMA Neurology Sep 2022Acute vertigo can be disabling. Antihistamines and benzodiazepines are frequently prescribed as "vestibular suppressants," but their efficacy is unclear. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Acute vertigo can be disabling. Antihistamines and benzodiazepines are frequently prescribed as "vestibular suppressants," but their efficacy is unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy of antihistamines and benzodiazepines in the treatment of acute vertigo from any underlying cause.
DATA SOURCES
We searched the PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from inception to January 14, 2019, without language restrictions. Bibliographies of the included studies and relevant reviews were also screened.
STUDY SELECTION
We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing antihistamine or benzodiazepine use with another comparator, placebo, or no intervention for patients with a duration of acute vertigo for 2 weeks or less. Studies of healthy volunteers, prophylactic treatment, or induced vertigo were excluded, as were studies that compared 2 medications from the same class.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by 2 authors independently for each study. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The predefined primary outcome was change in 10- or 100-point vertigo or dizziness visual analog scale (VAS) scores at 2 hours after treatment. Secondary outcomes included change in nausea VAS scores at 2 hours, use of rescue medication at 2 hours, and improvement or resolution of vertigo at 1 week or 1 month.
RESULTS
Of the 27 trials identified in the systematic review, 17 contributed to the quantitative meta-analysis and involved a total of 1586 participants. Seven trials with a total of 802 participants evaluated the primary outcome of interest: single-dose antihistamines resulted in significantly more improvement on 100-point VAS scores compared with benzodiazepines (difference, 16.1 [95% CI, 7.2 to 25.0]) but not compared with other active comparators (difference, 2.7 [95% CI, -6.1 to 11.5]). At 1 week and 1 month, neither daily benzodiazepines nor antihistamines were reported to be superior to placebo. RCTs comparing the immediate effects of medications (at 2 hours) after a single dose generally had a low risk of bias, but those evaluating 1-week and 1-month outcomes had a high risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Moderately strong evidence suggests that single-dose antihistamines provide greater vertigo relief at 2 hours than single-dose benzodiazepines. Furthermore, the available evidence did not support an association of benzodiazepine use with improvement in any outcomes for acute vertigo. Other evidence suggested that daily antihistamine use may not benefit patients with acute vertigo. Larger randomized trials comparing both antihistamines and benzodiazepines with placebo could better clarify the relative efficacy of these medications.
Topics: Benzodiazepines; Histamine Antagonists; Humans; Vertigo
PubMed: 35849408
DOI: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.1858 -
Asian Journal of Psychiatry Jan 2021Antipsychotics play a crucial role in the management of behavioral problems in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Oral and injectable antipsychotics are routinely... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Antipsychotics play a crucial role in the management of behavioral problems in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Oral and injectable antipsychotics are routinely prescribed to control emergent delirium or exacerbation of previous psychiatric symptoms. However scanty literature is available on the pharmacokinetics of antipsychotics in such patients. Avoiding amisulpride and warning against increasing the dosage in renal failure is the only recommendation by drug manufacturers and clinical guidelines. Hemodialysis affects the volume of distribution (V) and blood levels of antipsychotics in a complex manner. It is hence difficult to equate data on renal failure with hemodialysis to reliably predict the treatment response.
METHOD
We systematically analyzed online data from 1981 to 2019 on the use of antipsychotics in hemodialysis. The outcome was defined as the safety and efficacy of AP, measured in terms of adverse effects and relapse of existing or new onset of behavioral symptoms in Hemodialysis.
RESULTS
The data from 182 studies revealed that only 14 case reports and 1 case series met the review criteria. Oral Risperidone, Clozapine, Aripiprazole, Ziprasidone, Haloperidol, and Long-acting Risperidone, Flupenthixol, and Paliperidone were the antipsychotics studied in terms of pharmacokinetics during hemodialysis. AP levels in the blood were found to be unaffected in two studies during HD while the other two studies recommended scheduling of AP regimen w.r.t HD session. Six reports mentioned exacerbation of pre-existing psychiatric ailments in patients undergoing HD, the most common being schizophrenia.
CONCLUSION
Findings of the review reveals modest evidence favoring multiple dosing regimens of oral aripiprazole, ziprasidone, olanzapine, and risperidone. Long-acting risperidone and paliperidone are well tolerated and half of the conventional dose may be effective in the case of paliperidone. Though CYP-3A4 remains relatively and transiently unaltered during hemodialysis, none of the antipsychotics are compromised in HD. While selecting an AP during HD, one has to consider the protein binding, clearance by dialysis, duration of an HD session, route of administration of AP, and impaired bowel absorption in HD.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Benzodiazepines; Humans; Olanzapine; Renal Dialysis; Risperidone
PubMed: 33341539
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102484 -
Molecular Psychiatry Feb 2022A systematic review and random-effects model network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety of pharmacological... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A systematic review and random-effects model network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety of pharmacological interventions for adults with acute bipolar mania. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for eligible studies published before March 14, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of oral medication monotherapy lasting ≥10 days in adults with mania were included, and studies that allowed the use of antipsychotics as a rescue medication during a trial were excluded. The primary outcomes were response to treatment (efficacy) and all-cause discontinuation (acceptability). The secondary outcomes were the improvement of mania symptoms and discontinuation due to inefficacy. Of the 79 eligible RCTs, 72 double-blind RCTs of 23 drugs and a placebo were included in the meta-analysis (mean study duration = 3.96 ± 2.39 weeks, n = 16442, mean age = 39.55 years, with 50.93% males). Compared with the placebo, aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, tamoxifen, valproate, and ziprasidone outperformed response to treatment (N = 56, n = 14503); aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone had lower all-cause discontinuation; however, topiramate had higher all-cause discontinuation (N = 70, n = 16324). Compared with the placebo, aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, tamoxifen, valproate, and ziprasidone outperformed the improvement of mania symptoms (N = 61, n = 15466), and aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, valproate, and ziprasidone had lower discontinuation due to inefficacy (N = 50, n = 14284). In conclusions, these antipsychotics, carbamazepine, lithium, tamoxifen, and valproate were effective for acute mania. However, only aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone had better acceptability than the placebo.
Topics: Adult; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Benzodiazepines; Bipolar Disorder; Carbamazepine; Female; Haloperidol; Humans; Lithium; Male; Mania; Network Meta-Analysis; Olanzapine; Paliperidone Palmitate; Quetiapine Fumarate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risperidone; Tamoxifen; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 34642461
DOI: 10.1038/s41380-021-01334-4 -
Brain and Behavior Feb 2022Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a severe psychiatric disorder characterized by starvation and malnutrition, a high incidence of coexisting psychiatric conditions, and treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a severe psychiatric disorder characterized by starvation and malnutrition, a high incidence of coexisting psychiatric conditions, and treatment resistance. The effect of pharmacotherapy has been controversial.
METHOD
A systematic review was conducted for evidence of an effect of olanzapine versus placebo in adults or its effect as adjuvant treatment of AN in adolescents.
RESULTS
A total of seven articles (304 patients with AN) were identified. There were four double-blind, randomized studies examining the effect of olanzapine in the treatment of AN. The mean difference in body mass index (BMI) at the end of treatment between olanzapine and placebo was 0.67 kg/m (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15-1.18 kg/m ; p = 0.01; I = 0%, p for heterogeneity < 0.79). The olanzapine groups showed a significant increase in BMI of 0.68 kg/m (95% CI 0.22-1.13 kg/m ; p < 0.001; I = 0%, p for heterogeneity = 0.74) compared to the placebo groups. Only two studies examined the effect of olanzapine as adjuvant treatment in adolescents and showed an increase in BMI of 0.66 kg/m (95% CI -0.36 to 1.67 kg/m ; p = 0.21; I = 11%, p for heterogeneity = 0.32).
DISCUSSION
Olanzapine showed efficacy in the treatment of AN with an increased BMI at the end of treatment in adults. The effect of olanzapine as adjuvant treatment in adolescents remains unclear.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anorexia Nervosa; Benzodiazepines; Body Mass Index; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Olanzapine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35020271
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.2498 -
The Lancet. Psychiatry Sep 2023Bipolar depression constitutes a major public health problem due to its substantial burden of disease. Although pharmacological interventions are available, guidelines... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Bipolar depression constitutes a major public health problem due to its substantial burden of disease. Although pharmacological interventions are available, guidelines required updated evidence synthesis to improve their current recommendations. In order to inform evidence-based prescribing, we investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological interventions for acute bipolar depression.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis. We searched for randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological interventions with each other or placebo in adults with acute bipolar depression (type I, type II, or not otherwise specified), excluding those with substance misuse, unipolar depression, or schizophrenia, in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge, CINAHL, and LILACS from database inception up to April 13, 2023. Criteria for eligibility were a duration of 2-16 weeks with masked outcome assessments, and we included combination, add-on design, and monotherapy studies. The co-primary outcomes were depressive symptoms, examined with standardised mean differences (SMDs), and manic switch, examined with odds ratios (ORs). We also investigated dropouts due to any reason, inefficacy, adverse events, and important side-effects as secondary outcomes. The confidence in the evidence was evaluated using Confidence-In-Network-Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020171726.
RESULTS
We analysed data from 101 randomised controlled trials covering 20 081 participants, 8063 men (41·7%) and 11 263 women (58·3%; sex not available in four studies), mean age 41·0 years (range of means 28·7-53·6 years), and 68 medications and placebo. Ethnicity data were not available. With moderate confidence in the evidence, olanzapine plus fluoxetine, quetiapine, olanzapine, lurasidone, lumateperone, cariprazine, and lamotrigine were more efficacious than placebo in reducing depressive symptoms, with SMDs ranging from 0·41 (95% CI 0·19-0·64) for olanzapine plus fluoxetine to 0·16 (0·03-0·29) for lamotrigine. Several other drugs might also be efficacious, but the confidence in the evidence was very low to low. Antidepressants as a class seem to be efficacious, but had a higher risk for manic switch compared to antipsychotics. Medications differed in their side-effect profiles.
INTERPRETATION
This is, to our knowledge, the largest network meta-analysis of pharmacotherapy for bipolar depression to date. Olanzapine plus fluoxetine, quetiapine, olanzapine, lurasidone, lumateperone, cariprazine, and lamotrigine were found to be more efficacious than placebo in adults with acute bipolar depression, with good confidence in the evidence, and to differ in their side-effect profiles. These findings can inform evidence-based care and the development of treatment guidelines internationally.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Male; Adult; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Bipolar Disorder; Depression; Fluoxetine; Lamotrigine; Olanzapine; Lurasidone Hydrochloride; Quetiapine Fumarate; Network Meta-Analysis; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37595997
DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(23)00199-2 -
Epilepsy & Behavior : E&B Dec 2021Acute seizure activity might cause complications including bodily harm, progression to status epilepticus, and poor quality of life in children. The introduction of a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute seizure activity might cause complications including bodily harm, progression to status epilepticus, and poor quality of life in children. The introduction of a venous line may be difficult in children with seizures which would delay the initiation of treatment. Rectal drug administration can be socially awkward for patients and providers. Intranasal (IN) midazolam offers a valuable substitute that is easier and faster to administer.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of intranasal midazolam in children with acute seizure when compared to conventional IV or rectal benzodiazepine (BDZ).
METHODS
PubMed, google scholar, websites clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO-international clinical trials registry platform, were searched. Randomized controlled/prospective randomized trials comparing IN midazolam against IV/rectal BDZ in the treatment of acute seizures in pediatric patients were included in the meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Data of 10 studies were quantitatively analyzed. Intranasal midazolam (n = 169) when compared to IV/rectal BDZ (n = 161) has a shorter interval between hospital arrival and seizure cessation {(mean difference = -3.51; 95% CI [-6.84, -0.18]) P = 0.04}. Regarding time to seizure cessation after midazolam (n = 326) or BDZ (n = 322) administration, there is no significant difference between the two groups {(mean difference = -0.03; 95% CI [-1.30, 1.25]), P = 0.97} and both are equally effective for controlling acute seizures (odds ratio = 1.06; 95% CI [0.43, 2.63]; n = 737).
CONCLUSION
In children with acute seizures, IN midazolam is equally effective in aborting seizure and decreases the total time from hospital arrival and cessation of seizures, eventually leading to faster cessation of seizure as compared to IV/rectal BDZ.
Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Anticonvulsants; Benzodiazepines; Child; Diazepam; Humans; Midazolam; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures; Status Epilepticus
PubMed: 34740090
DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.108390