-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2021This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2014. Epilepsy is a common neurological condition characterised by recurrent seizures.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2014. Epilepsy is a common neurological condition characterised by recurrent seizures. Pharmacological treatment remains the first choice to control epilepsy. Sulthiame (STM) is widely used as an antiepileptic drug in Europe and Israel. In this review, we have presented a summary of evidence for the use of STM as monotherapy in epilepsy.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and side effect profile of STM as monotherapy when compared with placebo or another antiepileptic drug for people with epilepsy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 13 April 2020: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 10 April 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 (CENTRAL), and the specialised registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Cochrane Epilepsy. We imposed no language restrictions. We contacted the manufacturers of STM and researchers in the field to ask about ongoing and unpublished studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled monotherapy trials of STM in people of any age with epilepsy of any aetiology.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard Cochrane methodology. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted the relevant data. We assessed the following outcomes: treatment withdrawal; seizure-free at six months; adverse effects; and quality of life scoring. We conducted the primary analyses by intention-to-treat where possible, and presented a narrative analysis of the data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four studies involving a total of 355 participants: three studies (209 participants) with a diagnosis of benign epilepsy of childhood with centrotemporal spikes (BECTS), and one study (146 participants) with a diagnosis of generalised tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS). STM was given as monotherapy compared with placebo and with levetiracetam in the BECTS studies, and compared with phenytoin in the GTCS study. An English translation of the full text of one of the BECTS studies could not be found, and analysis of this study was based solely on the English translation of the abstract. For the primary outcome, the total number of dropouts caused either by seizure recurrence or adverse reaction was significantly higher in the levetiracetam treatment arm compared to the STM treatment arm (RR 0.32, 95% Cl 0.10 to 1.03; 1 study, 43 participants; low-certainty evidence). For the secondary outcomes for this comparison, results for seizure freedom were inconclusive (RR 1.12, 95% Cl 0.88 to 1.44; 1 study, 43 participants; low-certainty evidence). Reporting of adverse effects was incomplete. Participants receiving STM were significantly less likely to develop gingival hyperplasia than participants receiving phenytoin in the GTCS study (RR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.58; 1 study, 146 participants; low-certainty evidence). No further statistically significant adverse events were noted when STM was compared with phenytoin or placebo. The most common adverse events were related to behavioural disturbances when STM was compared with levetiracetam (RR 0.95, 95% Cl 0.59 to 1.55; 1 study, 43 participants; low-certainty evidence), with the same incidence in both groups. No data were reported for quality of life. Overall, we assessed one study at high risk of bias and one study at unclear bias across the seven domains, mainly due to lack of information regarding study design. Only one trial reported effective methods for blinding. The risk of bias assessments for the other two studies ranged from low to high. We rated the overall certainty of the evidence for the outcomes as low using the GRADE approach.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review provides insufficient information to inform clinical practice. Small sample sizes, poor methodological quality, and lack of data on important outcome measures precluded any meaningful conclusions regarding the efficacy and tolerability of sulthiame as monotherapy in epilepsy. More trials, recruiting larger populations, over longer periods, are needed to determine whether sulthiame has a clinical use.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Epilepsy; Humans; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thiazines
PubMed: 34554571
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010062.pub3 -
Seizure Mar 2023Cognitive measures are an important primary outcome of pediatric, adolescents, and childhood epilepsy surgery. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Cognitive measures are an important primary outcome of pediatric, adolescents, and childhood epilepsy surgery. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess whether there are long-term alterations (≥ 5 years) in the Full-Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ) of pediatric patients undergoing epilepsy surgery.
METHODS
Electronic databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Scopus) were searched for English articles from inception to October 2022 that examined intelligence outcomes in pediatric epilepsy surgery patients. Inclusion criteria were defined as the patient sample size of ≥ 5, average follow- up of ≥5 years, and surgeries performed on individuals ≤ 18 years old at the time of surgery. Exclusion criteria consisted of palliative surgery, animal studies, and studies not reporting surgical or FSIQ outcomes. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot and the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) toolset was used for quality appraisal of the selected articles. A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed to compare FSIQ between surgical patients at baseline and follow-up and Mean Difference (MD) was used to calculate the effect size of each study. Point estimates for effects and 95% confidence intervals for moderation analysis were performed on variables putatively associated with the effect size.
RESULTS
21,408 studies were screened for abstract and title. Of these, 797 fit our inclusion and exclusion criteria and proceeded to full-text screening. Overall, seven studies met our requirements and were selected. Quantitative analysis was performed on these studies (N = 330). The mean long-term difference between pre- and post- operative FSIQ scores across all studies was noted at 3.36 [95% CI: (0.14, 6.57), p = 0.04, I2 = 0%] and heterogeneity was low.
CONCLUSION
To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to measure the long-term impacts of FSIQ in pediatric and adolescent epilepsy patients. Our overall results in this meta-analysis indicate that while most studies do not show long-term FSIQ deterioration in pediatric patients who underwent epilepsy surgery, there was an increase of 3.36 FSIQ points, however, the observed changes were not clinically significant. Moreover, at the individual patient level analysis, while most children did not show long-term FSIQ deterioration, few had significant decline. These findings indicate the importance of surgery as a viable option for pediatric patients with medically refractory epilepsy.
Topics: Child; Humans; Epilepsy; Intelligence; Prognosis; Drug Resistant Epilepsy
PubMed: 36774775
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2023.01.020 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017Epilepsy is a common neurological condition, with an estimated incidence of 50 per 100,000 persons. People with epilepsy may present with various types of immunological... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Epilepsy is a common neurological condition, with an estimated incidence of 50 per 100,000 persons. People with epilepsy may present with various types of immunological abnormalities, such as low serum immunoglobulin A (IgA) levels, lack of the immunoglobulin G (IgG) subclass and identification of certain types of antibodies. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment may represent a valuable approach and its efficacy has important implications for epilepsy management. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 1, 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effects of IVIg on the frequency and duration of seizures, quality of life and adverse effects when used as monotherapy or as add-on treatment for people with epilepsy.
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (2 February 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (2 February 2017), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 2 February 2017), Web of Science (1898 to 2 February 2017), ISRCTN registry (2 February 2017), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP, 2 February 2017), the US National Institutes of Health ClinicalTrials.gov (2 February 2017), and reference lists of articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of IVIg as monotherapy or add-on treatment in people with epilepsy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. Outcomes included percentage of people rendered seizure-free, 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, adverse effects, treatment withdrawal and quality of life.
MAIN RESULTS
We included one study (61 participants). The included study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre trial which compared the treatment efficacy of IVIg as an add-on with a placebo add-on in patients with refractory epilepsy. There was no significant difference between IVIg and placebo in 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. The study reported a statistically significant effect for global assessment in favour of IVIg. No adverse effects were demonstrated. We found no randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of IVIg monotherapy for epilepsy. Overall, the included study was rated as low/unclear risk of bias. Using GRADE methodology, the quality of the evidence was rated as low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We cannot draw any reliable conclusions regarding the efficacy of IVIg as a treatment for epilepsy. Further randomized controlled trials are needed.
Topics: Epilepsy; Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28675262
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008557.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2014Epilepsy is a common neurological condition characterised by recurrent seizures. Sulthiame (STM) is widely used as an antiepileptic drug in Europe and Israel. In this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Epilepsy is a common neurological condition characterised by recurrent seizures. Sulthiame (STM) is widely used as an antiepileptic drug in Europe and Israel. In this review, we present a summary of evidence for the use of STM as monotherapy in epilepsy.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the efficacy and side effect profile of STM as monotherapy when compared with placebo or another antiepileptic drug.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialised Register (24 October 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 9), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 24 October 2013), SCOPUS (1823 to 24 October 2013), the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal (28 October 2013) and ClinicalTrials.gov (28 October 2013). We imposed no language restrictions. We contacted the manufacturers of STM and researchers in the field to ask about ongoing and unpublished studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled monotherapy trials of STM in people of any age with epilepsy of any aetiology.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted the relevant data.The following outcomes were assessed: (1) time to treatment failure; (2) time to 12-month remission; (3) proportion seizure free at 12 months; (4) adverse effects; and (5) quality of life scoring. Primary analyses were intention-to-treat when possible. A narrative analysis of the data was presented.
MAIN RESULTS
Two studies representing 100 participants with a diagnosis of benign epilepsy of childhood with centrotemporal spikes (BECTS) and one study representing 146 participants with a diagnosis of generalised tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS) were included. STM was given as monotherapy compared with placebo in the BECTS studies and compared with phenytoin in the GTCS study. An English translation of the full text of one of the BECTS studies could not be found, and analysis of this study was based solely on the English translation of the abstract. No data were reported for outcome (1), (2), (3) or (5). Reporting of adverse effects was incomplete. Participants receiving STM were significantly less likely to develop gingival hyperplasia than were participants receiving phenytoin in the GTCS study (risk ratio (RR) 0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.58). No further statistically significant adverse events were noted when STM was compared with phenytoin or placebo. Two ongoing studies comparing STM monotherapy versus placebo or levetiracetam in BECTS were identified.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Small sample size, poor methodological quality and lack of data on important outcome measures prevent any meaningful conclusions regarding the efficacy and safety of sulthiame as monotherapy in epilepsy.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Child; Child, Preschool; Early Termination of Clinical Trials; Epilepsy; Epilepsy, Tonic-Clonic; Female; Humans; Male; Phenytoin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thiazines
PubMed: 24609897
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010062.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2021This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2019. Catamenial epilepsy describes worsening seizures in relation to the menstrual cycle and may... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2019. Catamenial epilepsy describes worsening seizures in relation to the menstrual cycle and may affect around 40% of women with epilepsy. Vulnerable days of the menstrual cycle for seizures are perimenstrually (C1 pattern), at ovulation (C2 pattern), and during the luteal phase (C3 pattern). A reduction in progesterone levels premenstrually and reduced secretion during the luteal phase is implicated in catamenial C1 and C3 patterns. A reduction in progesterone has been demonstrated to reduce sensitivity to the inhibitory neurotransmitter in preclinical studies, hence increasing risk of seizures. A pre-ovulatory surge in oestrogen has been implicated in the C2 pattern of seizure exacerbation, although the exact mechanism by which this surge increases risk is uncertain. Current treatment practices include the use of pulsed hormonal (e.g. progesterone) and non-hormonal treatments (e.g. clobazam or acetazolamide) in women with regular menses, and complete cessation of menstruation using synthetic hormones (e.g. medroxyprogesterone (Depo-Provera) or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues (triptorelin and goserelin)) in women with irregular menses. Catamenial epilepsy and seizure exacerbation is common in women with epilepsy. Women may not receive appropriate treatment for their seizures because of uncertainty regarding which treatment works best and when in the menstrual cycle treatment should be taken, as well as the possible impact on fertility, the menstrual cycle, bone health, and cardiovascular health. This review aims to address these issues to inform clinical practice and future research.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of hormonal and non-hormonal treatments for seizures exacerbated by the menstrual cycle in women with regular or irregular menses. We synthesised the evidence from randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of hormonal and non-hormonal treatments in women with catamenial epilepsy of any pattern.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 20 July 2021 for the latest update: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 19 July 2021). CRS Web includes randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the specialised registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Cochrane Epilepsy. We used no language restrictions. We checked the reference lists of retrieved studies for additional reports of relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs and quasi-RCTs of blinded or open-label design that randomised participants individually (i.e. cluster-randomised trials were excluded). We included cross-over trials if each treatment period was at least 12 weeks in length and the trial had a suitable wash-out period. We included the following types of interventions: women with any pattern of catamenial epilepsy who received a hormonal or non-hormonal drug intervention in addition to an existing antiepileptic drug regimen for a minimum treatment duration of 12 weeks.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data on study design factors and participant demographics for the included studies. The primary outcomes of interest were: proportion seizure-free, proportion of responders (at least 50% decrease in seizure frequency from baseline), and change in seizure frequency. Secondary outcomes included: number of withdrawals, number of women experiencing adverse events of interest (seizure exacerbation, cardiac events, thromboembolic events, osteoporosis and bone health, mood disorders, sedation, menstrual cycle disorders, and fertility issues), and quality of life outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
Following title, abstract, and full-text screening, we included eight full-text articles reporting on four double-blind, placebo-controlled RCTs. We included two cross-over RCTs of pulsed norethisterone, and two parallel RCTs of pulsed progesterone recruiting a total of 192 women aged between 13 and 45 years with catamenial epilepsy. We found no RCTs for non-hormonal treatments of catamenial epilepsy or for women with irregular menses. Meta-analysis was not possible for the primary outcomes, therefore we undertook a narrative synthesis. For the two RCTs evaluating norethisterone versus placebo (24 participants), there were no reported treatment differences for change in seizure frequency. Outcomes for the proportion seizure-free and 50% responders were not reported. For the two RCTs evaluating progesterone versus placebo (168 participants), the studies reported conflicting results for the primary outcomes. One progesterone RCT reported no significant difference between progesterone 600 mg/day taken on day 14 to 28 and placebo with respect to 50% responders, seizure freedom rates, and change in seizure frequency for any seizure type. The other progesterone RCT reported a decrease in seizure frequency from baseline in the progesterone group that was significantly higher than the decrease in seizure frequency from baseline in the placebo group. The results of secondary efficacy outcomes showed no significant difference between groups in the pooled progesterone RCTs in terms of treatment withdrawal for any reason (pooled risk ratio (RR) 1.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 3.00, P = 0.18, I = 0%) or treatment withdrawals due to adverse events (pooled RR 2.91, 95% CI 0.53 to 16.17, P = 0.22, I = 0%). No treatment withdrawals were reported from the norethisterone RCTs. The RCTs reported limited information on adverse events, although one progesterone RCT reported no significant difference in the number of women experiencing adverse events (diarrhoea, dyspepsia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, nasopharyngitis, dizziness, headache, and depression). No studies reported on quality of life. We judged the evidence for outcomes related to the included progesterone RCTs to be of low to moderate certainty due to risk of bias, and for outcomes related to the included norethisterone RCTs to be of very low certainty due to serious imprecision and risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review provides very low-certainty evidence of no treatment difference between norethisterone and placebo, and moderate- to low-certainty evidence of no treatment difference between progesterone and placebo for catamenial epilepsy. However, as all the included studies were underpowered, important clinical effects cannot be ruled out. Our review highlights an overall deficiency in the literature base on the effectiveness of a wide range of other hormonal and non-hormonal interventions currently being used in practice, particularly for those women who do not have regular menses. Further clinical trials are needed in this area.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anticonvulsants; Epilepsy; Fatigue; Female; Humans; Menstruation; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures; Young Adult
PubMed: 34528245
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013225.pub3 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 2012Human toxocariasis is a zoonotic infection caused by the larval stages of Toxocara canis (T. canis) and less frequently Toxocara cati (T. cati). A relationship between... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Human toxocariasis is a zoonotic infection caused by the larval stages of Toxocara canis (T. canis) and less frequently Toxocara cati (T. cati). A relationship between toxocariasis and epilepsy has been hypothesized. We conducted a systematic review and a meta-analysis of available data to evaluate the strength of association between epilepsy and Toxocara spp. seropositivity and to propose some guidelines for future surveys.
DATA SOURCES
Electronic databases, the database from the Institute of Neuroepidemiology and Tropical Neurology of the University of Limoges (http://www-ient.unilim.fr/) and the reference lists of all relevant papers and books were screened up to October 2011.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of literature on toxocariasis (the exposure) and epilepsy (the outcome). Two authors independently assessed eligibility and study quality and extracted data. A common odds ratio (OR) was estimated using a random-effects meta-analysis model of aggregated published data.
RESULTS
Seven case-control studies met the inclusion criteria, for a total of 1867 participants (850 cases and 1017 controls). The percentage of seropositivity (presence of anti-Toxocara spp. antibodies) was higher among people with epilepsy (PWE) in all the included studies even if the association between epilepsy and Toxocara spp. seropositivity was statistically significant in only 4 studies, with crude ORs ranging 2.04-2.85. Another study bordered statistical significance, while in 2 of the included studies no significant association was found. A significant (p < 0.001) common OR of 1.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.50-2.44] was estimated. Similar results were found when meta-analysis was restricted to the studies considering an exclusively juvenile population and to surveys using Western Blot as confirmatory or diagnostic serological assay.
CONCLUSION
Our results support the existence of a positive association between Toxocara spp. seropositivity and epilepsy. Further studies, possibly including incident cases, should be performed to better investigate the relationship between toxocariasis and epilepsy.
Topics: Animals; Epilepsy; Humans; Toxocara; Toxocariasis
PubMed: 22905274
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001775 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2014Marijuana appears to have anti-epileptic effects in animals. It is not currently known if it is effective in patients with epilepsy. Some states in the United States of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Marijuana appears to have anti-epileptic effects in animals. It is not currently known if it is effective in patients with epilepsy. Some states in the United States of America have explicitly approved its use for epilepsy.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids when used as monotherapy or add-on treatment for people with epilepsy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (9 September 2013), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (Ovid) (9 September 2013), ISI Web of Knowledge (9 September 2013), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) (9 September 2013), and ClinicalTrials.gov (9 September 2013). In addition, we included studies we personally knew about that were not found by the searches, as well as searched the references in the identified studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) whether blinded or not.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted the data. The primary outcome investigated was seizure freedom at one year or more, or three times the longest interseizure interval. Secondary outcomes included responder rate at six months or more, objective quality of life data, and adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We found four randomized trial reports that included a total of 48 patients, each of which used cannabidiol as the treatment agent. One report was an abstract and another was a letter to the editor. Anti-epileptic drugs were continued in all studies. Details of randomisation were not included in any study report. There was no investigation of whether the control and treatment participant groups were the same or different. All the reports were low quality.The four reports only answered the secondary outcome about adverse effects. None of the patients in the treatment groups suffered adverse effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
No reliable conclusions can be drawn at present regarding the efficacy of cannabinoids as a treatment for epilepsy. The dose of 200 to 300 mg daily of cannabidiol was safely administered to small numbers of patients generally for short periods of time, and so the safety of long term cannabidiol treatment cannot be reliably assessed.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Cannabidiol; Epilepsy; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24595491
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009270.pub3 -
Seizure Oct 2021Diverse neuronal antibodies are related to autoimmune encephalitis (AE) and AE-related epilepsy. However, the epidemiological characteristics of AE, AE-associated... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Diverse neuronal antibodies are related to autoimmune encephalitis (AE) and AE-related epilepsy. However, the epidemiological characteristics of AE, AE-associated antibodies, and AE-related seizures are still unclear.
AIMS
This research evaluated the relationship between AE, AE-related seizures, and neuronal antibodies, as well as the morbidity of AE with early incidence.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched. Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Of the 4,869 citations identified, 100 articles were reviewed in full, and 42 subgroups were analyzed. The overall incidence of AE patients with seizures was 42% (95% CI: 0.40-0.44), and among them, the incidence of epilepsy in anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) encephalitis patients was 73% (95% CI: 0.70-0.77). Subsequently, we found that the prevalence of AE as the cause of epilepsy within the pooled period was 1% (95% CI: 0.01-0.02), while the overall positive rate of neuronal antibodies in epilepsy patients was 4% (95% CI: 0.03-0.05). Additionally, the detection rates of different antibodies among epilepsy patients were as follows: anti-NMDAR, 1%; anti-leucine-rich glioma inactivated 1 (LGI1), 1%; anti-contactin-associated protein-like 2 (CASPR2), 2%.
CONCLUSION
Based on our findings, neuronal antibodies may serve as a bridge to study AE and immune-related epilepsy. To further understand the differences in outcomes following different treatment measures, and to provide more information for public health policy and prevention, more research is needed to improve the accuracy of estimations.
Topics: Anti-N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptor Encephalitis; Autoantibodies; Encephalitis; Epilepsy; Hashimoto Disease; Humans
PubMed: 34284303
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2021.07.005 -
Neurology India 2021There are wide variations reported in the prevalence rates of common neurological disorders in India leading to huge treatment gap. There is no comprehensive systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There are wide variations reported in the prevalence rates of common neurological disorders in India leading to huge treatment gap. There is no comprehensive systematic review reporting prevalence of common neurological conditions affecting Indians which is essential for developing and aligning health services to meet patient care.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence of epilepsy, dementia, headache, and Parkinson's disease (PD) in India from 1980 to 2019.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
We performed a bibliographic systematic search in PubMed and Google Scholar along with manual search for peer-reviewed cross-sectional studies and community-based surveys reporting prevalence of epilepsy, dementia, headache, and PD in India from January 1980 to July 2019. Meta-analysis was performed adopting a random-effects model using "Metafor" package in R.
RESULTS
The systematic review and meta-analysis included 50 studies [epilepsy (n = 22), dementia (n = 19), headache (n = 6), and PD (n = 3)] including a total of 179,1541 participants of which 5,890 were diagnosed with epilepsy, 1,843 with dementia, 914 with headache, and 121 were diagnosed with PD. The pooled prevalence of epilepsy was 4.7 per 1,000 population (95% CI: 3.8-5.6) with high heterogeneity (P < 0.01, I = 98%). The prevalence of dementia was found to be 33.7 per 1,000 population (95% CI: 19.4-49.8) (P = 0, I = 100%). The pooled prevalence of headache and PD were found to be 438.8 per 1,000 population (95% CI: 287.6-602.3) (P < 0.0001, I = 97.99%), and 0.8 per 1,000 population (95%CI: 0.4-1.3) (P < 0.01, I = 95%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings could be used for appropriate policy measures and targeted treatments for addressing these conditions.
Topics: Cross-Sectional Studies; Dementia; Epilepsy; Headache; Humans; India; Parkinson Disease; Prevalence
PubMed: 33904437
DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.314588 -
The Journal of Maternal-fetal &... Dec 2024Although early evidence shows that epilepsy can increase the risks of adverse pregnancy, some outcomes are still debatable. We performed a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Although early evidence shows that epilepsy can increase the risks of adverse pregnancy, some outcomes are still debatable. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the effects of maternal and fetal adverse outcomes in pregnant women with epilepsy.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science were employed to collect studies that investigated the potential risk of obstetric complications during the antenatal, intrapartum, or postnatal period, as well as any neonatal complications. The search was conducted from inception to November 16, 2022. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the included original studies. The odds ratio (OR) values were extracted after adjusting for confounders to measure the relationship between pregnant women with epilepsy and adverse maternal or fetal outcomes. The protocol for this systematic review is registered with PROSPERO ID CRD42023391539.
RESULTS
Of 35 articles identified, there were 142,577 mothers with epilepsy and 34,381,373 mothers without epilepsy. Our study revealed a significant association between pregnant women with epilepsy (PWWE) and the incidence of cesarean section, preeclampsia/eclampsia, gestational hypertension, induction of labor, gestational diabetes and postpartum hemorrhage compared with those without epilepsy. Regarding newborns outcomes, PWWE versus those without epilepsy had increased odds of preterm birth, small for gestational age, low birth weight (<2500 g), and congenital malformations, fetal distress. The odds of operative vaginal delivery, newborn mortality, and Apgar (≤ 7) were similar between PWWE and healthy women.
CONCLUSION
Pregnant women affected by epilepsy encounter a higher risk of adverse obstetric outcomes and fetal complications. Therefore, it is crucial to develop appropriate prevention and intervention strategies prior to or during pregnancy to minimize the negative impacts of epilepsy on maternal and fetal health.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Epilepsy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome; Infant, Newborn
PubMed: 38735863
DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2024.2351196