-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2008Seizures can present at any time before or after diagnosis of a brain tumor. The risk of seizures varies by tumor type and its location in the brain. For a long time we... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Seizures can present at any time before or after diagnosis of a brain tumor. The risk of seizures varies by tumor type and its location in the brain. For a long time we believed that preventing seizures with antiepileptic drugs (seizure prophylaxis) was effective and necessary, but the supporting evidence was little and mixed. Such evidence was the basis for previous reviews to conclude that seizure prophylaxis was ineffective in people with brain tumors.
OBJECTIVES
To estimate the effectiveness of seizure prophylaxis in people with brain tumors, and to estimate the adverse event rates in the identified clinical trials.
SEARCH STRATEGY
A search strategy that included free-text and MeSH terms in LILACS, EMBASE, PubMed, CENTRAL, and The Cochrane Library (1966 to 2007).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Controlled clinical trials with random allocation, blinded or unblinded, and placebo or observation in the control groups.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We screened the articles, extracted the data, and rated the validity of each trial to assess the risk of bias. Our primary outcome was the occurrence of a first seizure. The secondary outcome was adverse events. We pooled the aggregate data for each outcome into a random-effects model meta-analysis using the relative risk (RR). For adverse events, we also included the number needed to harm (NNH) using the absolute risk increase to compute the NNH.
MAIN RESULTS
There was no difference between the treatment interventions and the control groups in preventing a first seizure in participants with brain tumors. The risk of an adverse event was higher for those on antiepileptic drugs than for participants not on antiepileptic drugs (NNH 3; RR 6.10, 95% CI 1.10 to 34.63; P = 0.046).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence is neutral, neither for nor against seizure prophylaxis, in people with brain tumors. These conclusions apply only for the antiepileptic drugs phenytoin, phenobarbital, and divalproex sodium. The decision to start an antiepileptic drug for seizure prophylaxis is ultimately guided by assessment of individual risk factors and careful discussion with patients.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Brain Neoplasms; Humans; Seizures
PubMed: 18425902
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004424.pub2 -
Epilepsia 2003Prevention of posttraumatic epilepsy (PTE) is of primary importance to reduce the degree of functional morbidity following traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, the... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Prevention of posttraumatic epilepsy (PTE) is of primary importance to reduce the degree of functional morbidity following traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, the effects of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in patients with TBI must be assessed separately in terms of prevention and control of provoked seizures (which include immediate and early posttraumatic seizures) and prevention of subsequent unprovoked seizures (late posttraumatic seizures or PTE).
METHODS
Potential mechanisms for prevention of epileptogenesis as well as reports and systematic reviews were evaluated to determine strategies and results of attempts to reduce or prevent the development of epilepsy following TBI.
RESULTS
In observational studies, after a period ranging from 6 months to 13 years, the proportion of cases developing seizures was 0-10% in patients receiving treatment compared to 2-50% in those who were left untreated. In randomized clinical trials, the difference between active treatment [phenytoin (PHT), phenobarbital, or carbamazepine (CBZ)] and placebo was less remarkable after a follow-up ranging from 3 to 60 months and was virtually lacking for the prevention of PTE. In a Cochrane systematic review of 890 patients from 10 RCTs assessing PHT or CBZ, the pooled relative risk (RR) for prevention of early seizures was 0.33 (95% CI 0.21-0.52). By contrast, the RR for prevention of late seizures was 1.28 (95% CI 0.90-1.81). Mortality and neurological disability were similar in the two treatment groups. The use of PHT was followed by an increased (nonsignificant) risk of skin rashes. In addition, cognitive performance was significantly affected by PHT in severely injured patients at 1 month and treatment withdrawal was followed by improvement in cognitive function.
CONCLUSIONS
The failure to influence the risk of PTE in studies of patients with TBI are similar to findings of meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials on seizure prevention in other conditions, such as febrile seizures, cerebral malaria, craniotomy, and excessive alcohol intake. For these reasons, the prophylactic use of AEDs should be short-lasting and limited to the prevention of immediate and early seizures. Chronic treatment should be considered only after a diagnosis of PTE.
Topics: Animals; Anticonvulsants; Brain Injuries; Epilepsy, Post-Traumatic; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors
PubMed: 14511391
DOI: 10.1046/j.1528-1157.44.s10.1.x -
Journal (Canadian Dental Association) 2011Long-term use of phenytoin (PHT) causes gingival hyperplasia; however, little is known about the oral side effects of other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Through a... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Long-term use of phenytoin (PHT) causes gingival hyperplasia; however, little is known about the oral side effects of other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Through a systematic review of the literature, we explored the effects of AEDs on the oral health of patients with epilepsy.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library between January 1963 and August 2010. The search strategy retrieved 170 abstracts. We included studies that involved original research and had ā„ 10 patients in our review. We also checked the reference lists of reviews, letters and other manuscripts to find studies that met our selection criteria.
RESULTS
Only 15 articles were included in the final analysis. Gingival hyperplasia was very common in patients taking PHT (16%-94% of patients). Alveolar bone loss occurred in patients taking carbamazepine or PHT. Patients taking valproate, carbamazepine or phenobarbital also had gingival hyperplasia. We found no published studies of newer-generation AEDs.
CONCLUSION
Although several studies examined the effects of PHT on oral health, none have studied those of the newer generation of AEDs. Studies exploring oral side effects of AEDs are needed.
Topics: Alveolar Bone Loss; Anticonvulsants; Carbamazepine; Epilepsy; Gingival Hyperplasia; Humans; Oral Health; Phenobarbital; Phenytoin
PubMed: 22260801
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2014This review has been withdrawn as the original review author team are unable to update the review. We hope to reallocate to another review author team in the near... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This review has been withdrawn as the original review author team are unable to update the review. We hope to reallocate to another review author team in the near future. The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Epilepsy; Epilepsy, Tonic-Clonic; Humans; Medicine, Chinese Traditional; Phenobarbital; Phenytoin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 24619450
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006454.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2002Cerebral malaria is a common complication of Plasmodium falciparum infection, and kills over a million people every year. People with cerebral malaria become... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cerebral malaria is a common complication of Plasmodium falciparum infection, and kills over a million people every year. People with cerebral malaria become unconscious, and often have protracted convulsions. It is unclear whether giving anticonvulsant drugs routinely to people with cerebral malaria will improve the outcome of treatment and prevent death.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of routine anticonvulsant drugs in people with cerebral malaria.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group specialized trials register (November 2001), The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 4, 2001), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2001), EMBASE (1988 to October 2001), LILACS (2001, 40a Edition CD-ROM), Science Citation Index (November 2001), African Index Medicus (1999), reference lists of articles, and research organizations. We also contacted the authors for addtional information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of people with cerebral malaria. The trials compared anticonvulsant drugs started on admission to hospital with no anticonvulsant drug or placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently extracted data from those trials eligible for inclusion. We assessed the methodological quality of the included trials by considering allocation sequence, concealment of allocation, blinding, and inclusion of all randomized participants. We used Review Manager (version 4.1) for the meta-analysis and also explored possible sources of heterogeneity.
MAIN RESULTS
Three trials with a total of 573 participants met the inclusion criteria. These trials all compared phenobarbitone with placebo or no treatment. In the two trials with adequate allocation concealment, death was more common in the anticonvulsant group (Relative Risk 2.0; 95% confidence interval 1.20 to 3.33; fixed effect model). In all three trials, phenobarbitone compared with placebo or no treatment was associated with fewer convulsions (Relative Risk 0.30; 95% confidence interval 0.19 to 0.45; fixed effect model).
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
Routine phenobarbitone in cerebral malaria is associated with fewer convulsions but possibly more deaths. Further trials with adequate design, more participants, and different doses of anticonvulsant drugs are needed.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Humans; Malaria, Cerebral; Phenobarbital; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures
PubMed: 12076440
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002152 -
BMC Veterinary Research Mar 2018Understanding the efficacy and safety profile of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in feline epilepsy is a crucial consideration for managing this important brain disease....
BACKGROUND
Understanding the efficacy and safety profile of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in feline epilepsy is a crucial consideration for managing this important brain disease. However, there is a lack of information about the treatment of feline epilepsy and therefore a systematic review was constructed to assess current evidence for the AEDs' efficacy and tolerability in cats. The methods and materials of our former systematic reviews in canine epilepsy were mostly mirrored for the current systematic review in cats. Databases of PubMed, CAB Direct and Google scholar were searched to detect peer-reviewed studies reporting efficacy and/or adverse effects of AEDs in cats. The studies were assessed with regards to their quality of evidence, i.e. study design, study population, diagnostic criteria and overall risk of bias and the outcome measures reported, i.e. prevalence and 95% confidence interval of the successful and affected population in each study and in total.
RESULTS
Forty studies describing clinical outcomes of AEDs' efficacy and safety were included. Only two studies were classified as "blinded randomised controlled trials". The majority of the studies offered high overall risk of bias and described low feline populations with unclear diagnostic criteria and short treatment or follow-up periods. Individual AED assessments of efficacy and safety profile showed that phenobarbital might currently be considered as the first choice AED followed by levetiracetam and imepitoin. Only imepitoin's safety profile was supported by strong level of evidence. Imepitoin's efficacy as well as remaining AEDs' efficacy and safety profile were supported by weak level of evidence.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review reflects an evidence-based assessment of the published data on the AEDs' efficacy and safety for feline epilepsy. Currently, phenobarbital is likely to be the first-line for feline epileptic patients followed by levetiracetam and imepitoin. It is essential that clinicians evaluate both AEDs' effectiveness and tolerability before tailoring AED to the individual patient. Further studies in feline epilepsy treatment are by far crucial in order to establish definite guidelines for AEDs' efficacy and safety.
Topics: Animals; Anticonvulsants; Cat Diseases; Cats; Epilepsy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29499762
DOI: 10.1186/s12917-018-1386-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2007Neonates from isoimmunized pregnancies have increased morbidity from neonatal jaundice. The increased bilirubin from haemolysis often needs phototherapy, exchange... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Neonates from isoimmunized pregnancies have increased morbidity from neonatal jaundice. The increased bilirubin from haemolysis often needs phototherapy, exchange transfusion or both after birth. Various trials in pregnant women who were not isoimmunized but had other risk factors for neonatal jaundice have shown a reduction in need for phototherapy and exchange transfusion by the use of antenatal phenobarbital. A recent retrospective case-controlled study showed reduction in the need for exchange transfusion for the neonates from isoimmunized pregnancies.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of antenatal phenobarbital in red cell isoimmunized pregnancies in reducing the incidence of phototherapy and exchange transfusion for the neonate.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (June 2006).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of pregnant women established to have red cell isoimmunization in the current pregnancy during their antenatal testing and given phenobarbital alone or in combination with other drugs before birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
All three review authors independently assessed study eligibility and quality.
MAIN RESULTS
No trials met the inclusion criteria for this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The use of antenatal phenobarbital to reduce neonatal jaundice in red cell isoimmunized pregnant women has not been evaluated in randomised controlled trials.
Topics: Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Jaundice, Neonatal; Phenobarbital; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Rh Isoimmunization
PubMed: 17443599
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005541.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2014Status epilepticus is a medical emergency associated with significant mortality and morbidity that requires immediate and effective treatment. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Status epilepticus is a medical emergency associated with significant mortality and morbidity that requires immediate and effective treatment.
OBJECTIVES
(1) To determine whether a particular anticonvulsant is more effective or safer to use in status epilepticus compared to another and compared to placebo.(2) To delineate reasons for disagreement in the literature regarding recommended treatment regimens and to highlight areas for future research.
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update of this review, the following electronic databases were searched on 15/08/2013: the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialized Register, CENTRAL The Cochrane Library July 2013, Issue 7, and MEDLINE (Ovid) 1946 to 15/08/2013.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of participants with premonitory, early, established or refractory status epilepticus using a truly random or quasi-random allocation of treatments were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
Eighteen studies with 2755 participants were included. Few studies used the same interventions. Intravenous diazepam was better than placebo in reducing the risk of non-cessation of seizures (risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.92), requirement for ventilatory support (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.94), or continuation of status epilepticus requiring use of a different drug or general anaesthesia (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.92). Intravenous lorazepam was better than placebo for risk of non-cessation of seizures (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.71) and for risk of continuation of status epilepticus requiring a different drug or general anaesthesia (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.71). Intravenous lorazepam was better than intravenous diazepam for reducing the risk of non-cessation of seizures (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.90) and had a lower risk for continuation of status epilepticus requiring a different drug or general anaesthesia (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.88). Intravenous lorazepam was better than intravenous phenytoin for risk of non-cessation of seizures (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.86). Diazepam gel was better than placebo gel in reducing the risk of non-cessation of seizures (RR 0.43 95% CI 0.30 to 0.62)For pre-hospital treatment, intramuscular midazolam is at least as effective as (probably more effective than) intravenous lorazepam in control of seizures (RR1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.27) and frequency of hospitalisation (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.97) or intensive care admissions (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.96). It was uncertain whether Intravenous valproate was better than intravenous phenytoin in reducing risk of non-cessation of seizures (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.00). Both levetiracetam and lorazepam were equally effective in aborting seizures (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.13). Results for other comparisons of anticonvulsant therapies were uncertain due to single studies with few participants.The body of randomised evidence to guide clinical decisions is small. It was uncertain whether any anticonvulsant therapy was better than another in terms of adverse effects, due to few studies and participants identified. The quality of the evidence from the included studies is not strong but appears acceptable. We were unable to make judgements for risk of bias domains incomplete outcome reporting (attrition bias) and selective outcome reporting (selection bias) due to unclear reporting by the study authors.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Intravenous lorazepam is better than intravenous diazepam or intravenous phenytoin alone for cessation of seizures. Intravenous lorazepam also carries a lower risk of continuation of status epilepticus requiring a different drug or general anaesthesia compared with intravenous diazepam. Both intravenous lorazepam and diazepam are better than placebo for the same outcomes. For pre hospital management, midazolam IM seemed more effective than lorazepam IV for cessation of seizures, frequency of hospitalisation and ICU admissions however,it was unclear whether the risk of recurrence of seizures differed between treatments. The results of other comparisons of anticonvulsant therapies versus each other were also uncertain. Universally accepted definitions of premonitory, early, established and refractory status epilepticus are required. Diazepam gel was better than placebo gel in reducing the risk of non-cessation of seizures. Results for other comparisons of anticonvulsant therapies were uncertain due to single studies with few participants.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Diazepam; Humans; Injections, Intravenous; Lorazepam; Midazolam; Phenobarbital; Phenytoin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Status Epilepticus
PubMed: 25207925
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003723.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2018Any type of seizure can be observed in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Antiepileptic drugs seem to prevent the recurrence of epileptic seizures in most people with AD. There...
BACKGROUND
Any type of seizure can be observed in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Antiepileptic drugs seem to prevent the recurrence of epileptic seizures in most people with AD. There are pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for epilepsy in people with AD. There are no current systematic reviews to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of these treatments; this review aims to review those different modalities. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 11, 2016.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of epilepsy in people with AD (including sporadic AD and dominantly inherited AD).
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update, on 10 July 2018 we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialized Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid 1946- ), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials investigating treatment for epilepsy in people with AD, with the outcomes of proportion of participants with seizure freedom or proportion of participants experiencing adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to the limited available data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included one randomized controlled trial on pharmacological interventions with 95 participants. No studies were found for non-pharmacological interventions. Concerning the proportion of participants with seizure freedom, no significant differences were found for the comparisons of levetiracetam (LEV) versus lamotrigine (LTG) (risk ratio (RR) 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 2.71), LEV versus phenobarbital (PB) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.19), or LTG versus PB (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.02). It seemed that LEV could improve cognition and LTG could relieve depression, while PB and LTG could worsen cognition, and LEV and PB could worsen mood. Unclear risk of bias was found in allocation, blinding and selective reporting. We judged the quality of the evidence to be very low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support LEV, PB or LTG for the treatment of epilepsy in people with AD. Regarding efficacy and tolerability, no significant differences were found between LEV, PB and LTG. Large randomized controlled trials with a double-blind, parallel-group design are required to determine the efficacy and tolerability of treatment for epilepsy in people with AD.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alzheimer Disease; Anticonvulsants; Cognition; Depression; Epilepsy; Female; Humans; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Male; Phenobarbital; Secondary Prevention
PubMed: 30570742
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011922.pub3 -
JAMA Pediatrics Mar 2019Incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome is rising rapidly, and optimal pharmacotherapy may meaningfully reduce length of treatment.
IMPORTANCE
Incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome is rising rapidly, and optimal pharmacotherapy may meaningfully reduce length of treatment.
OBJECTIVE
To compare pharmacological therapies for neonatal abstinence syndrome.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic review and network meta-analysis of Medline (1946-June 2018), Embase (1974-June 2018), Cochrane CENTRAL (1966-June 2018), Web of Science (1900-June 2018), and ClinicalTrials.gov (June 2018).
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials of pharmacological treatments for neonatal abstinence syndrome alone or in combination with adjuvant treatments. Abstract, title, and full-text screening were conducted independently by 2 reviewers (T.D. and C.G.).
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data extraction was conducted independently by 2 reviewers (T.D. and C.G.) according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-Network Meta-Analyses guidelines. Quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and data were pooled with fixed-effect models as a result of the low number of trials that were included in the analysis.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was the length of treatment. The length of stay, need for adjuvant therapy, and adverse events were considered as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
Eighteen trials (Nā=ā1072) were eligible for inclusion. The treatments that were included in the length of treatment analysis were buprenorphine, clonidine, diluted tincture of opium and clonidine, diluted tincture of opium, morphine, methadone, and phenobarbital. Sublingual buprenorphine was considered the optimal treatment for a reduction in the length of treatment (days: mean difference vs morphine, -12.75 [95% CI, -17.97 to -7.58]; median rank, 1 [3-1]) and length of stay (days: mean difference vs morphine, -11.43 [95% CI, -16.95 to -5.82]; median rank, 1 [3-1]) but not the need for adjuvant treatment (odds ratio vs morphine, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.46-3.44]; median rank, 3 [5-1]). The results were robust to bias but sensitive to imprecision.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The current evidence suggests that buprenorphine is the optimal treatment for neonatal abstinence treatment, but limitations are considerable and wide-scale adoption requires a large multisite trial. Morphine, which is considered standard of care in most hospitals, was the lowest-ranked opioid for length of treatment and length of stay.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Buprenorphine; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30667476
DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.5044