-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2019. Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders. It is estimated that up to 30%... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2019. Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders. It is estimated that up to 30% of individuals with epilepsy continue to have epileptic seizures despite treatment with an antiepileptic drug. These patients are classified as drug-resistant and require treatment with a combination of multiple antiepileptic drugs. Brivaracetam is a third-generation antiepileptic drug that is a high-affinity ligand for synaptic vesicle protein 2A. In this review we investigated the use of brivaracetam as add-on therapy for epilepsy.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of brivaracetam when used as add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant epilepsy.
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update we searched the following databases on 7 September 2021: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web); MEDLINE (Ovid) 1946 to 3 September 2021. CRS Web includes randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 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.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for parallel-group RCTs that recruited people of any age with drug-resistant epilepsy. We accepted studies with any level of blinding (double-blind, single-blind, or unblinded).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
In accordance with standard Cochrane methodological procedures, two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion before evaluating trial quality and extracting relevant data. The primary outcome to be assessed was 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. Secondary outcomes were: seizure freedom, treatment withdrawal for any reason, treatment withdrawal due to adverse events, the proportion of participants who experienced any adverse events, and drug interactions. We used an intention-to-treat population for all primary analyses, and presented results as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS
We did not identify any new studies for this update, therefore the results and conclusions of the review are unchanged. The previous review included six studies involving a total of 2411 participants. Only one study included participants with both focal and generalised onset seizures; the other five trials included participants with focal onset seizures only. Study participants were aged 16 to 80 years. Treatment periods ranged from 7 to 16 weeks. We judged two studies to have low risk of bias and four to have unclear risk of bias. Details on the method used for allocation concealment and how blinding was maintained were insufficient in one study each. One study did not report all outcomes prespecified in the trial protocol, and there were discrepancies in reporting in a further study. Participants receiving brivaracetam add-on were more likely to experience a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency than those receiving placebo (RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.14; 6 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Participants receiving brivaracetam were more likely to attain seizure freedom; however, the evidence is of low certainty (RR 5.89, 95% CI 2.30 to 15.13; 6 studies). The incidence of treatment withdrawal for any reason was slightly greater for participants receiving brivaracetam compared to those receiving placebo (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.74; 6 studies; low-certainty evidence). The risk of participants experiencing one or more adverse events did not differ significantly following treatment with brivaracetam compared to placebo (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.17; 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). However, participants receiving brivaracetam did appear to be more likely to withdraw from treatment due to adverse events compared with those receiving placebo (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.33; 6 studies; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When used as add-on therapy for individuals with drug-resistant epilepsy, brivaracetam may be effective in reducing seizure frequency and may aid patients in achieving seizure freedom. However, add-on brivaracetam is probably associated with a greater proportion of treatment withdrawals due to adverse events compared with placebo. It is important to note that only one of the eligible studies included participants with generalised epilepsy. None of the included studies involved participants under the age of 16, and all studies were of short duration. Consequently, the findings of this review are mainly applicable to adult patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Future research should focus on investigating the tolerability and efficacy of brivaracetam during longer-term follow-up, as well as assess the efficacy and tolerability of add-on brivaracetam in managing other types of seizures and in other age groups.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Drug Resistant Epilepsy; Drug Therapy, Combination; Epilepsy, Generalized; Humans; Pyrrolidinones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures
PubMed: 35285519
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011501.pub3 -
Epilepsia Mar 2016Stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG) is a procedure performed for patients with intractable epilepsy in order to anatomically define the epileptogenic zone (EZ) and the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG) is a procedure performed for patients with intractable epilepsy in order to anatomically define the epileptogenic zone (EZ) and the possible related functional cortical areas. By avoiding the need for large craniotomies and due to its intrinsic precision placement features, SEEG may be associated with fewer complications. Nevertheless, intracerebral electrodes have gained a reputation of excessive invasiveness, with a "relatively high morbidity" associated with their placement. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of SEEG complications has not been previously performed. The goal of this study is to quantitatively review the incidence of various surgical complications associated with SEEG electrode implantation in the literature and to provide a summary estimate. This will allow physicians to accurately counsel their patients about the potential complications related to this method of extraoperative invasive monitoring.
METHODS
The systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We conducted MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science database searches with the search algorithm. We analyzed complication rates using a fixed-effects model with inverse variance weighting. Calculations for the meta-analysis and construction of forest plots were completed using an established spreadsheet. The principal summary measures were the effect summary value and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
The initial 1,901 retrieved citations were reviewed. After removing 787 duplicates, the titles and abstracts of 1,114 publications were screened. At this stage, studies that did not mention the absence or presence of complications following SEEG or that did not fulfill the inclusion criteria in any manner were excluded. After excluding 1,057 citations, the full text was assessed in the resulting 57 articles for eligibility criteria. The most common complications were hemorrhagic (pooled prevalence 1.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.6-1.4%) or infectious (pooled prevalence 0.8%, 95% CI 0.3-1.2%). Five mortalities were identified (pooled prevalence 0.3%, 95% CI -0.1-0.6%). Overall, our analysis identified 121 surgical complications related to SEEG insertion and monitoring (pooled prevalence 1.3%, 95% CI 0.9-1.7%).
SIGNIFICANCE
This review represents a comprehensive estimation of the actual incidence of complications related to SEEG. We report a rate substantially lower than the complication rates reported for other methods of extraoperative invasive monitoring. These data should alleviate the concerns of some regarding the safety of the "stereotactic" method, allowing a better decision process among the different methods of invasive monitoring and ameliorating the fear associated with the placement of depth electrodes.
Topics: Electroencephalography; Epilepsy; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Stereotaxic Techniques
PubMed: 26899389
DOI: 10.1111/epi.13298 -
The Journal of International Medical... Nov 2023Due to variability in reports, the aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the incidence and risk factors of post-stroke early seizures (ES) and post-stroke epilepsy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Due to variability in reports, the aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the incidence and risk factors of post-stroke early seizures (ES) and post-stroke epilepsy (PSE).
METHODS
The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were searched for post-stroke ES/PSE articles published on any date up to November 2020. Post-stroke ES included seizures occurring within 7 days of stroke, and PSE included at least one unprovoked seizure. Using random effects models, the incidence and risk factors of post-stroke ES and PSE were evaluated. The study was retrospectively registered with INPLASY (INPLASY2023100008).
RESULTS
Of 128 included studies in total, the incidence of post-stroke ES was 0.07 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05, 0.10) and PSE was 0.10 (95% CI 0.08, 0.13). The rates were higher in children than adults. Risk factors for post-stroke ES included hemorrhagic stroke (odds ratio [OR] 2.14, 95% CI 1.44, 3.18), severe strokes (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.73, 4.14), cortical involvement (OR 3.09, 95% CI 2.11, 4.51) and hemorrhagic transformation (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.58, 4.60). Risk factors for PSE included severe strokes (OR 4.92, 95% CI 3.43, 7.06), cortical involvement (OR 3.20, 95% CI 2.13, 4.81), anterior circulation infarcts (OR 3.28, 95% CI 1.34, 8.03), hemorrhagic transformation (OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.25, 6.30) and post-stroke ES (OR 7.24, 95% CI 3.73, 14.06).
CONCLUSION
Understanding the risk factors of post-stroke ES/PSE may identify high-risk individuals who might benefit from prophylactic treatment.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Incidence; Seizures; Stroke; Epilepsy; Risk Factors
PubMed: 38008901
DOI: 10.1177/03000605231213231 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2015This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2012 (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 1).The efficacy and safety of vigabatrin (VGB) as an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2012 (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 1).The efficacy and safety of vigabatrin (VGB) as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy have been well established. However, this information needs to be weighed against the risk of development of visual field defects. Whether VGB monotherapy is an effective and safe treatment compared with the standard antiepileptic drug carbamazepine (CBZ) as monotherapy for epilepsy has not been systematically reviewed.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the efficacy and safety of VGB versus CBZ monotherapy for epilepsy in children and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 3 of 4), MEDLINE (1948 to July 2015), EMBASE (1974 to July 2015) and the Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM) (1979 to July 2015). We searched trial registers and contacted the manufacturer of VGB and authors of included studies for additional information. We applied no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing VGB versus CBZ monotherapy for epilepsy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcome was time to treatment withdrawal. Secondary outcomes were time to achieve six-month and 12-month remission after randomisation, time to first seizure after randomisation and adverse events. We presented results as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) (time to event data) or as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs (adverse events).
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies involving a total of 734 participants were eligible for inclusion. We assessed only one study as good quality and the other four as poor quality. However, it was difficult to perform a meta-analysis by extracting aggregate data to synthesise the results as originally planned, mainly because not all studies reported the same outcomes as those chosen for this review. No significant differences favoured VGB or CBZ in terms of time to treatment withdrawal and time to achieve six-month remission after dose stabilisation from randomisation, but results did show a disadvantage for VGB on time to first seizure after randomisation. Compared with CBZ, VGB was associated with more occurrences of weight gain and fewer occurrences of skin rash and drowsiness. No differences in visual field defects and visual disturbances were noted.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Data are currently insufficient to address the risk-benefit balance of VGB versus CBZ monotherapy for epilepsy. Given the high prevalence of visual field defects reported in an existing systematic review of observational studies (Maguire 2010), VGB monotherapy should be prescribed with caution for epilepsy and should not be considered a first-line choice. If necessary, the visual field should be frequently assessed. Future research should focus on investigating the reasons for visual field defects and exploring potential prevention strategies. Moreover, future monotherapy studies of epilepsy should report results according to the recommendations of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Commission, and methodological quality should be improved.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Carbamazepine; Epilepsy; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Vigabatrin
PubMed: 26580100
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008781.pub3 -
Neurology Jan 2023Early life epilepsies are common and often debilitating, but no evidence-based management guidelines exist outside of those for infantile spasms. We conducted a...
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Early life epilepsies are common and often debilitating, but no evidence-based management guidelines exist outside of those for infantile spasms. We conducted a systematic review of the effectiveness and harms of pharmacologic and dietary treatments for epilepsy in children aged 1-36 months without infantile spasms.
METHODS
We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library for studies published from January 1, 1999, to August 19, 2021. Using prespecified criteria, we identified studies reporting data on children aged 1-36 months receiving pharmacologic or dietary treatments for epilepsy. We did not require that studies report etiology-specific data. We excluded studies of neonates, infantile spasms, and status epilepticus. We included studies administering 1 of 29 pharmacologic treatments and/or 1 of 5 dietary treatments reporting effectiveness outcomes at ≥ 12 weeks. We reviewed the full text to find any subgroup analyses of children aged 1-36 months.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria (6 randomized studies, 2 nonrandomized comparative studies, and 15 prestudies/poststudies). All conclusions were rated low strength of evidence. Levetiracetam leads to seizure freedom in some infants (32% and 66% in studies reporting seizure freedom), but data on 6 other medications were insufficient to permit conclusions about effectiveness (topiramate, lamotrigine, phenytoin, vigabatrin, rufinamide, and stiripentol). Three medications (levetiracetam, topiramate, and lamotrigine) were rarely discontinued because of adverse effects, and severe events were rare. For diets, the ketogenic diet leads to seizure freedom in some infants (rates 12%-37%), and both the ketogenic diet and modified Atkins diet reduce average seizure frequency, but reductions are greater with the ketogenic diet (1 RCT reported a 71% frequency reduction at 6 months for ketogenic diet vs only a 28% reduction for the modified Atkins diet). Dietary harms were not well-reported.
DISCUSSION
Little high-quality evidence exists on pharmacologic and dietary treatments for early life epilepsies. Future research should isolate how treatments contribute to outcomes, conduct etiology-specific analyses, and report patient-centered outcomes such as hospitalization, neurodevelopment, functional performance, sleep quality, and patient and caregiver quality of life.
TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION
This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021220352) on March 5, 2021.
Topics: Infant; Infant, Newborn; Child; Humans; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Topiramate; Spasms, Infantile; Quality of Life; Epilepsy; Anticonvulsants; Diet, Ketogenic
PubMed: 36270899
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000201026 -
Seizure Jan 2013The gamma-aminobutyric acid A receptor, gamma 2 (GABRG2) gene encodes the GABRγ2 protein, which has been implicated in susceptibility to epilepsy. Several studies have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
The gamma-aminobutyric acid A receptor, gamma 2 (GABRG2) gene encodes the GABRγ2 protein, which has been implicated in susceptibility to epilepsy. Several studies have examined a possible link between the exonic GABRG2 rs211037 locus and susceptibility to febrile seizure (FS) and idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE), however results have been inconclusive. We therefore performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine whether this polymorphism is associated with FS or IGE.
METHODS
Eight studies comprising 1871 epilepsy patients and 1387 controls, which evaluated association of the GABRG2 rs211037 polymorphism with susceptibility to epilepsy, were included in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was carried out separately for FS and IGE.
RESULTS
Meta-analysis showed a significant association between this polymorphism and susceptibility to FS in a codominant (TT vs. CC, OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.73, p=0.0008 and TT vs. CT, OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42-0.83, p=0.003) and dominant (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39-0.75, p=0.0002) genetic models, influenced by two studies with small sample size. Neither allele nor genotype association was observed with IGE.
CONCLUSION
This study showed significant association of GABRG2 rs211037 with susceptibility to FS, caused by two studies with small sample sizes, however the possibility of false positive results due to the effect of significant studies for FS cannot be excluded. Future studies with larger sample sizes of these patients are suggested to verify the results.
Topics: Epilepsy; Genetic Association Studies; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Humans; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Receptors, GABA-A
PubMed: 23140995
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2012.10.007 -
Epilepsy & Behavior : E&B Sep 2021The epilepsy surgery treatment gap is well defined and secondary to a broad range of issues, including healthcare professionals' (HCPs') knowledge, attitude, and... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The epilepsy surgery treatment gap is well defined and secondary to a broad range of issues, including healthcare professionals' (HCPs') knowledge, attitude, and perception (KAP) toward epilepsy surgery. However, no previous systematic reviews investigated this important topic.
METHODS
The systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We identified a total of 652 articles from multiple databases using database-specific queries and included 65 articles for full-text review after screening the titles and abstracts of the articles. Finally, we selected 11 papers for qualitative analysis. We critically appraised the quality of the studies using the Joanna Briggs critical appraisal tool.
RESULTS
The qualitative analysis of the content identified several key reasons causing healthcare professional-related barriers to epilepsy surgery: inadequate knowledge and awareness about the role of epilepsy surgery in drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), poor identification and referral of patients with DRE, insufficient selection of candidates for presurgical workup, negative or ambivalent attitudes and perceptions regarding epilepsy surgery, deficient communication practices with patients regarding risk-benefit analysis of epilepsy surgery, and challenging coordination issues with the surgical referral. Neurologists with formal instruction in epilepsy, surgical exposure during training, participation in high volume epilepsy practice, or prior experience in surgical referral may refer more patients for surgical evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS
While significant work has been conducted in a limited number of studies to explore HCPs' knowledge gap and educational need regarding epilepsy surgery, further research is needed in defining the learning goals, assessing and validating specific learning gaps among providers, defining the learning outcomes, optimizing the educational format, content, and outcome measures, and appraising the achieved results following the educational intervention.
Topics: Epilepsy; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Health Personnel; Humans; Learning; Perception
PubMed: 34273740
DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.108199 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review first published in 2014 and last updated in 2020. For nearly 30% of people with epilepsy, current treatments do not... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review first published in 2014 and last updated in 2020. For nearly 30% of people with epilepsy, current treatments do not control seizures. Stiripentol is an antiepileptic drug (AED) that was developed in France and was approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in 2007 as an adjunctive therapy with valproate and clobazam for the treatment of Dravet syndrome.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of stiripentol as add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy who are taking AEDs.
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE on 28 March 2022. We contacted the manufacturer of stiripentol and epilepsy experts to identify published, unpublished and ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of add-on stiripentol in people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. We investigated outcomes including 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, seizure freedom, adverse effects, treatment withdrawal and changes in quality of life.
MAIN RESULTS
On the basis of our selection criteria, we included no new studies in the present review update. We included only one study from the original review (32 children with focal epilepsy). This study adopted a responder-enriched design and found no clear evidence of a reduction of 50% or more in seizure frequency (risk ratio (RR) 1.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 2.82; low-certainty evidence) and no clear evidence of seizure freedom (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.31 to 4.43; low-certainty evidence) when comparing add-on stiripentol with placebo. Stiripentol led to a greater risk of adverse effects considered as a whole (RR 2.65, 95% CI 1.08 to 6.47; low-certainty evidence). When we considered specific adverse effects, CIs were very wide and showed the possibility of substantial increases and small reductions in risks of neurological adverse effects (RR 2.65, 95% CI 0.88 to 8.01; low-certainty evidence). Researchers noted no clear reduction in the risk of study withdrawal (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.47; low-certainty evidence), which was high in both groups (53.3% in placebo group and 35.3% in stiripentol group; low-certainty evidence). The external validity of this study was limited because only responders to stiripentol (i.e. participants experiencing a decrease in seizure frequency of 50% or greater during an open prerandomisation phase compared with baseline) were included in the randomised, add-on, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase. Furthermore, carry-over and withdrawal effects probably influenced outcomes related to seizure frequency. Very limited information derived from the only included study shows that adverse effects considered as a whole may occur more often with add-on stiripentol than with add-on placebo.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We have found no new studies since the last version of this review was published. Hence, we have made no changes to the conclusions as presented in previous versions. We can draw no conclusions to support the use of stiripentol as add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Additional large, randomised, well-conducted trials are needed.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Child; Dioxolanes; Drug Resistant Epilepsy; Drug Therapy, Combination; Epilepsies, Partial; Humans; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures
PubMed: 36066395
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009887.pub6 -
JAMA Neurology May 2023Pregnant women who have epilepsy need adequate engagement, information, and pregnancy planning and management to improve pregnancy outcomes. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Pregnant women who have epilepsy need adequate engagement, information, and pregnancy planning and management to improve pregnancy outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate perinatal outcomes in women with epilepsy compared with women without epilepsy.
DATA SOURCES
Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched with no language or date restrictions (database inception through December 6, 2022). Searches also included OpenGrey and Google Scholar and manual searching in journals and reference lists of included studies.
STUDY SELECTION
All observational studies comparing women with and without epilepsy were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The PRISMA checklist was used for abstracting data and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for risk-of-bias assessment. Data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment were done independently by 2 authors with mediation conducted independently by a third author. Pooled unadjusted odds ratios (OR) or mean differences were reported with 95% CI from random-effects (I2 heterogeneity statistic >50%) or fixed-effects (I2 < 50%) meta-analyses.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Maternal, fetal, and neonatal complications.
RESULTS
Of 8313 articles identified, 76 were included in the meta-analyses. Women with epilepsy had increased odds of miscarriage (12 articles, 25 478 pregnancies; OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.15-2.29), stillbirth (20 articles, 28 134 229 pregnancies; OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.29-1.47), preterm birth (37 articles, 29 268 866 pregnancies; OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.32-1.51) and maternal death (4 articles, 23 288 083 pregnancies; OR, 5.00; 95% CI, 1.38-18.04). Neonates born to women with epilepsy had increased odds of congenital conditions (29 articles, 24 238 334 pregnancies; OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.66-2.12), neonatal intensive care unit admission (8 articles, 1 204 428 pregnancies; OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.58-2.51), and neonatal or infant death (13 articles, 1 426 692 pregnancies; OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.56-2.24). The increased odds of poor outcomes was increased with greater use of antiseizure medication.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This systematic review and meta-analysis found that women with epilepsy have worse perinatal outcomes compared with women without epilepsy. Women with epilepsy should receive pregnancy counseling from an epilepsy specialist who can also optimize their antiseizure medication regimen before and during pregnancy.
Topics: Infant; Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Premature Birth; Pregnancy Outcome; Pregnancy Complications; Epilepsy; Abortion, Spontaneous
PubMed: 36912826
DOI: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2023.0148 -
Seizure Oct 2021We systematically reviewed the existing literature on the cosmetic adverse effects of antiseizure medications (ASMs) in order to depict a clear picture of these unwanted... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
We systematically reviewed the existing literature on the cosmetic adverse effects of antiseizure medications (ASMs) in order to depict a clear picture of these unwanted side effects of ASMs with a particular attention to hair loss, hirsutism, acne, and gingival hyperplasia.
METHODS
This systematic review was prepared according to the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Scopus, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar from the inception to 25 March, 2021 were systematically searched. These key words (title/abstract) were used: "hair loss" OR "hirsutism" OR "acne" OR "gingival hyperplasia" AND "seizure" OR "epilepsy" OR "anriseizure" OR "antiepileptic". The exclusion criteria included: non-original studies, articles not in English, and animal studies.
RESULTS
The primary search yielded 3938 studies; 127 studies were related to the topic and were included in the current systematic review. The most robust evidence on cosmetic adverse effects of ASMs were related to phenytoin (causing gingival hyperplasia, hirsutism, and acne) and valproate (causing hair loss and hirsutism); however, many other ASMs were also implicated in causing these cosmetic adverse effects.
CONCLUSION
Antiseizure medications may be associated with various cosmetic adverse effects. Phenytoin and valproate are the most notorious ASMs in this regard; but, other ASMs have also been implicated in causing hair loss, hirsutism, acne, and gingival hyperplasia. Physicians should pay more attention to these significant adverse effects that may affect a patient's facial attractiveness, quality of life, and emotional state.
Topics: Animals; Anticonvulsants; Epilepsy; Humans; Phenytoin; Quality of Life; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 34052629
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2021.05.010