-
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 Mar 2014This review has been withdrawn as the original review author team are unable to update the review.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This review has been withdrawn as the original review author team are unable to update the review.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 The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.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 -
Epileptic Disorders : International... Dec 2011In recent years, phenobarbital, as an antiepileptic drug, has become less popular based on adverse events, especially cognitive and behavioural side effects. Despite the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
In recent years, phenobarbital, as an antiepileptic drug, has become less popular based on adverse events, especially cognitive and behavioural side effects. Despite the development of better tolerated new generation AEDs, phenobarbital is still widely used particularly in developing countries because of its low cost. The purpose of this review was to: (i) investigate whether phenobarbital can be safely used as an antiepileptic drug and (ii) determine the questions which need to be addressed in order to comprehensively and adequately evaluate the safety of phenobarbital for the treatment of epilepsy.
METHODS
The literature was searched using the Cochrane Central Register of randomised controlled trials (1800-2009), Medline (1966-2009), Embase (1966-2009) and three Chinese databases.
RESULTS
Twenty studies were finally included in this systematic review. The determination of adverse effects of combined antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) from different studies was complicated by numerous factors including study design, different descriptions of adverse events and a lack of standardised data collection. These factors may also have been responsible for the heterogeneity present in the meta-analysis. The data did not demonstrate any evidence of association between phenobarbital and a higher risk of adverse events. However, phenobarbital appeared to be associated with a higher rate of adverse drug reaction related withdrawal (ADR-related withdraw), compared to carbamazepine, valproic acid and phenytoin. This may have been due to a concern for possible adverse effects of phenobarbital.
CONCLUSIONS
Phenobarbital was associated with a higher rate of drug withdrawal although there was no evidence to suggest that phenobarbital caused more adverse events compared to carbamazepine, valproic acid or phenytoin. However, in the case of pregnant women, it is important for clinicians to evaluate the benefits and risks of phenobarbital administration before making a final recommendation. Furthermore, unified scales for the assessment of cognitive function should be applied for future studies particularly in children.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Carbamazepine; Child; Cognition Disorders; Cohort Studies; Cross-Over Studies; Data Collection; Data Interpretation, Statistical; Epilepsy; Female; Humans; Male; Phenobarbital; Phenytoin; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Research; Research Design; Treatment Outcome; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 21926048
DOI: 10.1684/epd.2011.0444 -
Revista de NeurologiaWe discuss some controversial aspects with prescription of generic drugs (GD) and the problems concerning bioequivalence, mainly in the case of drugs with non-linear... (Review)
Review
AIM
We discuss some controversial aspects with prescription of generic drugs (GD) and the problems concerning bioequivalence, mainly in the case of drugs with non-linear pharmacokinetics and/or narrow therapeutic rank, like the antiepileptic drugs (AED).
DEVELOPMENT
There is considerable debate about GD in the treatment of epilepsy, with clearly advantages (cost saving) and disadvantages (loss of seizure control or drug toxicity) in prescribing generics anticonvulsants. We make a systematic review of the literature in primary (PubMed) and secondary (Tripdatabase and Cochrane Library) bibliographic databases in relation to GD and AED. The main information is about classical AED (phenytoin, carbamazepine, valproic acid and primidone) and we don't found studies in this area about the new AED. The level of evidence is, generally, weak, based on case-series and expert opinion without explicit critical appraisal (except in phenytoin with level of evidence moderate, based on some analytical studies). In Spain, at this moment, there are only two generic AED, one-classical (carbamazepine) and one-new (gabapentin).
CONCLUSION
The American Academy of Neurology and Epilepsy Foundation maintains that the individual and physician should be notified and give their consent before a switch in antiepileptic medications is made, whether it involves generic substitution for brand name products, or generic to generic substitutions.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Drug Costs; Drug Prescriptions; Drugs, Generic; Epilepsy; Humans; Therapeutic Equivalency
PubMed: 16317637
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2006Cardenolides are naturally occurring plant toxins which act primarily on the heart. While poisoning with the digitalis cardenolides (digoxin and digitoxin) are reported... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cardenolides are naturally occurring plant toxins which act primarily on the heart. While poisoning with the digitalis cardenolides (digoxin and digitoxin) are reported worldwide, cardiotoxicity from other cardenolides such as the yellow oleander are also a major problem, with tens of thousands of cases of poisoning each year in South Asia. Because cardenolides from these plants are structurally similar, acute poisonings are managed using similar treatments. The benefit of these treatments is of interest, particularly in the context of cost since most poisonings occur in developing countries where resources are very limited.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy of antidotes for the treatment of acute cardenolide poisoning, in particular atropine, isoprenaline (isoproterenol), multiple-dose activated charcoal (MDAC), fructose-1,6-diphosphate, sodium bicarbonate, magnesium, phenytoin and anti-digoxin Fab antitoxin.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Controlled Trials Register of the Cochrane Collaboration, Current Awareness in Clinical Toxicology, Info Trac, www.google.com.au, and Science Citation Index of studies identified by the previous searches. We manually searched the bibliographies of identified articles and personally contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials where antidotes were administered to patients with acute symptomatic cardenolide poisoning were identified.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently extracted data on study design, including the method of randomisation, participant characteristics, type of intervention and outcomes from each study. We independently assessed methodological quality of the included studies. A pooled analysis was not appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
Two randomised controlled trials were identified, both were conducted in patients with yellow oleander poisoning. One trial investigated the effect of MDAC on mortality, the relative risk (RR) was 0.31 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 0.83) indicating a beneficial effect. The second study found a beneficial effect of anti-digoxin Fab antitoxin on the presence of cardiac dysrhythmias at two hours post-administration; the RR was 0.60 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.81). Other benefits were also noted in both studies and serious adverse effects were minimal. Studies assessing the effect of antidotes on other cardenolides were not identified. One ongoing study investigating the activated charcoal for acute yellow oleander self-poisoning was also identified.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is some evidence to suggest that MDAC and anti-digoxin Fab antitoxin may be effective treatments for yellow oleander poisoning. However, the efficacy and indications of these interventions for the treatment of acute digitalis poisoning is uncertain due to the lack of good quality controlled clinical trials. Given pharmacokinetic differences between individual cardenolides, the effect of antidotes administered to patients with yellow oleander poisoning cannot be readily translated to those of other cardenolides. Unfortunately cost limits the use of antidotes such as anti-digoxin Fab antitoxin in developing countries where cardenolide poisonings are frequent. More research is required using relatively cheap antidotes which may also be effective.
Topics: Acute Disease; Antidotes; Cardenolides; Cardiac Glycosides; Charcoal; Humans; Phytotherapy; Poisoning; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thevetia
PubMed: 17054261
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005490.pub2 -
Epilepsy Research Sep 2008To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the incidence of congenital malformations (CMs) and other pregnancy outcomes as a function of in utero... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the incidence of congenital malformations (CMs) and other pregnancy outcomes as a function of in utero anti-epileptic drug (AED) exposure.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature review to identify all published registries and cohort studies of births from pregnant women with epilepsy (WWE) that reported incidence of CMs. Overall incidences were calculated using a random effects model.
RESULTS
The review included 59 studies that met inclusion/exclusion criteria, involving 65,533 pregnancies in WWE and 1,817,024 in healthy women. The calculated incidence of births with CM in WWE [7.08%; 95% CIs 5.62, 8.54] was higher than healthy women [2.28%; CIs 1.46, 3.10]. Incidence was highest for AED polytherapy [16.78%; CIs 0.51, 33.05]. The AED with the highest CM incidence was valproate, which was 10.73% [CIs 8.16, 13.29] for valproate monotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS
Results of this systematic literature review suggest that the overall incidence of CMs in children born of WWE is approximately threefold that of healthy women. The risk is elevated for all AED monotherapy and further elevated for AED polytherapy compared to women without epilepsy. The risk was significantly higher for children exposed to valproate monotherapy and to polytherapy of 2 or more drugs when the polytherapy combination included phenobarital, phenytoin, or valproate. Further research is needed to delineate the specific risk for each individual AED and to determine underlying mechanisms including genetic risk factors.
Topics: Abnormalities, Drug-Induced; Adult; Anticonvulsants; Cohort Studies; Data Interpretation, Statistical; Databases, Factual; Drug Therapy, Combination; Epilepsy; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; MEDLINE; Male; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Registries; Risk Factors
PubMed: 18565732
DOI: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2008.04.022 -
Seizure May 2020To compare the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam and phenytoin for the treatment of established status epilepticus. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam and phenytoin for the treatment of established status epilepticus.
METHODS
In this systematic review, we searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases from their inception with no language restrictions until May 8, 2019 and updated on February 5, 2020, for randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam and phenytoin for the treatment of established status epilepticus. A Meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the risk ratio (RR) using random-effects models.
RESULTS
We identified 7 trials with a total of 1028 participants. Levetiracetam was not associated with an increased rate of clinical seizure cessation within 60 min compared with phenytoin (RR, 1.02; 95 %CI, 0.92-1.13; I = 3%; 60.0 % [309/515] vs 59.3 % [275/463];12 more events [95 % CI, -48 to 77] per 1000 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Results were similar in the subgroup analysis of adults and children. The sample size met the optimum size in trial sequential analysis. There were also no statistically significant effects on good functional outcome (RR, 1.05; 95 % CI, 0.90-1.23), admission to critical care (RR, 1.09; 95 % CI, 0.95-1.24), or all-cause mortality (RR, 1.09; 95 % CI, 0.55-2.16).
CONCLUSIONS
Moderate-quality evidence suggested that levetiracetam was not significantly superior to phenytoin in seizure cessation in patients with established status epilepticus.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Humans; Levetiracetam; Phenytoin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Status Epilepticus
PubMed: 32182544
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2020.03.002 -
Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data.The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2017Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for partial onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, remission and first seizure of 10 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and SCOPUS, and two clinical trials registers. We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field. The date of the most recent search was 27 July 2016.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
This was an individual participant data (IPD) review and network meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was 'time to withdrawal of allocated treatment', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', 'time to first seizure post-randomisation', and 'occurrence of adverse events'. We presented all time-to-event outcomes as Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed pairwise meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons between drugs within trials to obtain 'direct' treatment effect estimates and we performed frequentist network meta-analysis to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 10 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct estimates and network meta-analysis via node splitting. Due to variability in methods and detail of reporting adverse events, we have not performed an analysis. We have provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
IPD was provided for at least one outcome of this review for 12,391 out of a total of 17,961 eligible participants (69% of total data) from 36 out of the 77 eligible trials (47% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 41 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions.We were able to calculate direct treatment effect estimates for between half and two thirds of comparisons across the outcomes of the review, however for many of the comparisons, data were contributed by only a single trial or by a small number of participants, so confidence intervals of estimates were wide.Network meta-analysis showed that for the primary outcome 'Time to withdrawal of allocated treatment,' for individuals with partial seizures; levetiracetam performed (statistically) significantly better than current first-line treatment carbamazepine and other current first-line treatment lamotrigine performed better than all other treatments (aside from levetiracetam); carbamazepine performed significantly better than gabapentin and phenobarbitone (high-quality evidence). For individuals with generalised onset seizures, first-line treatment sodium valproate performed significantly better than carbamazepine, topiramate and phenobarbitone (moderate- to high-quality evidence). Furthermore, for both partial and generalised onset seizures, the earliest licenced treatment, phenobarbitone seems to perform worse than all other treatments (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Network meta-analysis also showed that for secondary outcomes 'Time to 12-month remission of seizures' and 'Time to six-month remission of seizures,' few notable differences were shown for either partial or generalised seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence). For secondary outcome 'Time to first seizure,' for individuals with partial seizures; phenobarbitone performed significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; carbamazepine performed significantly better than sodium valproate, gabapentin and lamotrigine. Phenytoin also performed significantly better than lamotrigine (high-quality evidence). In general, the earliest licenced treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for both seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Generally, direct evidence and network meta-analysis estimates (direct plus indirect evidence) were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping.The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the high-quality evidence provided by this review supports current guidance (e.g. NICE) that carbamazepine and lamotrigine are suitable first-line treatments for individuals with partial onset seizures and also demonstrates that levetiracetam may be a suitable alternative. High-quality evidence from this review also supports the use of sodium valproate as the first-line treatment for individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types) and also demonstrates that lamotrigine and levetiracetam would be suitable alternatives to either of these first-line treatments, particularly for those of childbearing potential, for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option due to teratogenicity.
Topics: Adult; Amines; Anticonvulsants; Carbamazepine; Child; Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids; Epilepsies, Partial; Epilepsy; Epilepsy, Generalized; Fructose; Gabapentin; Humans; Isoxazoles; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Network Meta-Analysis; Oxcarbazepine; Phenobarbital; Phenytoin; Piracetam; Remission Induction; Topiramate; Triazines; Valproic Acid; Zonisamide; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 29243813
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011412.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2017Febrile seizures occurring in a child older than one month during an episode of fever affect 2% to 4% of children in Great Britain and the United States and recur in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Febrile seizures occurring in a child older than one month during an episode of fever affect 2% to 4% of children in Great Britain and the United States and recur in 30%. Rapid-acting antiepileptics and antipyretics given during subsequent fever episodes have been used to avoid the adverse effects of continuous antiepileptic drugs.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate primarily the effectiveness and safety of antiepileptic and antipyretic drugs used prophylactically to treat children with febrile seizures; but also to evaluate any other drug intervention where there was a sound biological rationale for its use.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 7); MEDLINE (1966 to July 2016); Embase (1966 to July 2016); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) (July 2016). We imposed no language restrictions. We also contacted researchers in the field to identify continuing or unpublished studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Trials using randomised or quasi-randomised participant allocation that compared the use of antiepileptic, antipyretic or other plausible agents with each other, placebo or no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (RN and MO) independently applied predefined criteria to select trials for inclusion and extracted the predefined relevant data, recording methods for randomisation, blinding and exclusions. For the 2016 update a third author (MC) checked all original inclusions, data analyses, and updated the search. Outcomes assessed were seizure recurrence at 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, and 48 months and at age 5 to 6 years in the intervention and non-intervention groups, and adverse medication effects. We assessed the presence of publication bias using funnel plots.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 40 articles describing 30 randomised trials with 4256 randomised participants. We analysed 13 interventions of continuous or intermittent prophylaxis and their control treatments. Methodological quality was moderate to poor in most studies. We found no significant benefit for intermittent phenobarbitone, phenytoin, valproate, pyridoxine, ibuprofen or zinc sulfate versus placebo or no treatment; nor for diclofenac versus placebo followed by ibuprofen, acetaminophen or placebo; nor for continuous phenobarbitone versus diazepam, intermittent rectal diazepam versus intermittent valproate, or oral diazepam versus clobazam.There was a significant reduction of recurrent febrile seizures with intermittent diazepam versus placebo or no treatment, with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.64 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48 to 0.85 at six months), RR of 0.69 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.84) at 12 months, RR 0.37 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.60) at 18 months, RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.95) at 24 months, RR 0.58 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.85) at 36 months, RR 0.36 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.89) at 48 months, with no benefit at 60 to 72 months. Phenobarbitone versus placebo or no treatment reduced seizures at 6, 12 and 24 months but not at 18 or 72 month follow-up (RR 0.59 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.83) at 6 months; RR 0.54 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.70) at 12 months; and RR 0.69 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.89) at 24 months). Intermittent clobazam compared to placebo at six months resulted in a RR of 0.36 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.64), an effect found against an extremely high (83.3%) recurrence rate in the controls, which is a result that needs replication.The recording of adverse effects was variable. Lower comprehension scores in phenobarbitone-treated children were found in two studies. In general, adverse effects were recorded in up to 30% of children in the phenobarbitone-treated group and in up to 36% in benzodiazepine-treated groups. We found evidence of publication bias in the meta-analyses of comparisons for phenobarbitone versus placebo (eight studies) at 12 months but not at six months (six studies); and valproate versus placebo (four studies) at 12 months, with too few studies to identify publication bias for the other comparisons.Most of the reviewed antiepileptic drug trials are of a methodological quality graded as low or very low. Methods of randomisation and allocation concealment often do not meet current standards; and treatment versus no treatment is more commonly seen than treatment versus placebo, leading to obvious risks of bias. Trials of antipyretics and zinc were of higher quality.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found reduced recurrence rates for children with febrile seizures for intermittent diazepam and continuous phenobarbitone, with adverse effects in up to 30%. Apparent benefit for clobazam treatment in one trial needs to be replicated to be judged reliable. Given the benign nature of recurrent febrile seizures, and the high prevalence of adverse effects of these drugs, parents and families should be supported with adequate contact details of medical services and information on recurrence, first aid management and, most importantly, the benign nature of the phenomenon.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Antipyretics; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Infant; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Seizures, Febrile
PubMed: 28225210
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003031.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2020Antisocial personality disorder (AsPD) is associated with rule-breaking, criminality, substance use, unemployment, relationship difficulties, and premature death.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Antisocial personality disorder (AsPD) is associated with rule-breaking, criminality, substance use, unemployment, relationship difficulties, and premature death. Certain types of medication (drugs) may help people with AsPD. This review updates a previous Cochrane review, published in 2010.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and adverse effects of pharmacological interventions for adults with AsPD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 13 other databases and two trials registers up to 5 September 2019. We also checked reference lists and contacted study authors to identify studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials in which adults (age 18 years and over) with a diagnosis of AsPD or dissocial personality disorder were allocated to a pharmacological intervention or placebo control condition.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Four authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We assessed risk of bias and created 'Summary of findings tables' and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE framework. The primary outcomes were: aggression; reconviction; global state/global functioning; social functioning; and adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 studies (three new to this update), involving 416 participants with AsPD. Most studies (10/11) were conducted in North America. Seven studies were conducted exclusively in an outpatient setting, one in an inpatient setting, and one in prison; two studies used multiple settings. The average age of participants ranged from 28.6 years to 45.1 years (overall mean age 39.6 years). Participants were predominantly (90%) male. Study duration ranged from 6 to 24 weeks, with no follow-up period. Data were available from only four studies involving 274 participants with AsPD. All the available data came from unreplicated, single reports, and did not allow independent statistical analysis to be conducted. Many review findings were limited to descriptive summaries based on analyses carried out and reported by the trial investigators. No study set out to recruit participants on the basis of having AsPD; many participants presented primarily with substance abuse problems. The studies reported on four primary outcomes and six secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes were aggression (six studies) global/state functioning (three studies), social functioning (one study), and adverse events (seven studies). Secondary outcomes were leaving the study early (eight studies), substance misuse (five studies), employment status (one study), impulsivity (one study), anger (three studies), and mental state (three studies). No study reported data on the primary outcome of reconviction or the secondary outcomes of quality of life, engagement with services, satisfaction with treatment, housing/accommodation status, economic outcomes or prison/service outcomes. Eleven different drugs were compared with placebo, but data for AsPD participants were only available for five comparisons. Three classes of drug were represented: antiepileptic; antidepressant; and dopamine agonist (anti-Parkinsonian) drugs. We considered selection bias to be unclear in 8/11 studies, attrition bias to be high in 7/11 studies, and performance bias to be low in 7/11 studies. Using GRADE, we rated the certainty of evidence for each outcome in this review as very low, meaning that we have very little confidence in the effect estimates reported. Phenytoin (antiepileptic) versus placebo One study (60 participants) reported very low-certainty evidence that phenytoin (300 mg/day), compared to placebo, may reduce the mean frequency of aggressive acts per week (phenytoin mean = 0.33, no standard deviation (SD) reported; placebo mean = 0.51, no SD reported) in male prisoners with aggression (skewed data) at endpoint (six weeks). The same study (60 participants) reported no evidence of difference between phenytoin and placebo in the number of participants reporting the adverse event of nausea during week one (odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 16.76; very low-certainty evidence). The study authors also reported that no important side effects were detectable via blood cell counts or liver enzyme tests (very low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure reconviction, global/state functioning or social functioning. Desipramine (antidepressant) versus placebo One study (29 participants) reported no evidence of a difference between desipramine (250 to 300 mg/day) and placebo on mean social functioning scores (desipramine = 0.19; placebo = 0.21), assessed with the family-social domain of the Addiction Severity Index (scores range from zero to one, with higher values indicating worse social functioning), at endpoint (12 weeks) (very low-certainty evidence). Neither of the studies included in this comparison measured the other primary outcomes: aggression; reconviction; global/state functioning; or adverse events. Nortriptyline (antidepressant) versus placebo One study (20 participants) reported no evidence of a difference between nortriptyline (25 to 75 mg/day) and placebo on mean global state/functioning scores (nortriptyline = 0.3; placebo = 0.7), assessed with the Symptom Check List-90 (SCL-90) Global Severity Index (GSI; mean of subscale scores, ranging from zero to four, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms), at endpoint (six months) in men with alcohol dependency (very low-certainty evidence). The study measured side effects but did not report data on adverse events for the AsPD subgroup. The study did not measure aggression, reconviction or social functioning. Bromocriptine (dopamine agonist) versus placebo One study (18 participants) reported no evidence of difference between bromocriptine (15 mg/day) and placebo on mean global state/functioning scores (bromocriptine = 0.4; placebo = 0.7), measured with the GSI of the SCL-90 at endpoint (six months) (very low-certainty evidence). The study did not provide data on adverse effects, but reported that 12 patients randomised to the bromocriptine group experienced severe side effects, five of whom dropped out of the study in the first two days due to nausea and severe flu-like symptoms (very low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure aggression, reconviction and social functioning. Amantadine (dopamine agonist) versus placebo The study in this comparison did not measure any of the primary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence summarised in this review is insufficient to draw any conclusion about the use of pharmacological interventions in the treatment of antisocial personality disorder. The evidence comes from single, unreplicated studies of mostly older medications. The studies also have methodological issues that severely limit the confidence we can draw from their results. Future studies should recruit participants on the basis of having AsPD, and use relevant outcome measures, including reconviction.
Topics: Adult; Aggression; Alcohol-Related Disorders; Amantadine; Antisocial Personality Disorder; Anxiety; Bromocriptine; Desipramine; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Nortriptyline; Phenytoin; Placebos; Psychotropic Drugs; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32880105
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007667.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2012Seizure activity in the early post-traumatic period following head injury may cause secondary brain damage as a result of increased metabolic demands, raised... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Seizure activity in the early post-traumatic period following head injury may cause secondary brain damage as a result of increased metabolic demands, raised intracranial pressure and excess neurotransmitter release.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of prophylactic anti-epileptic agents for acute traumatic head injury.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group specialised register, MEDLINE and the registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group and Cochrane Epilepsy Group. We contacted pharmaceutical companies who manufacture anti-epileptic agents, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Epilepsy Division, and the United States' National Institute of Health.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised trials of anti-epileptic agents, in which study participants had a clinically defined acute traumatic head injury of any severity. Trials in which the intervention was started more than eight weeks after injury were excluded.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the trial quality. Relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated for each trial on an intention-to-treat basis, which included pre-drug loading exclusions. As long as statistical heterogeneity did not exist, for dichotomous data, summary relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a fixed effects model. Where the source of heterogeneity could obviously be related to allocation concealment, drug type, or drug dose, we stratified the analyses on that dimension.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 10 eligible randomised controlled trials, including 2036 participants, but data was unavailable for four unpublished trials, representing 631 participants and they were excluded. For the remaining six trials, the pooled relative risk (RR) for early seizure prevention was 0.34 (95%CI 0.21, 0.54); based on this estimate, for every 100 patients treated, 10 would be kept seizure free in the first week. Seizure control in the acute phase was not accompanied by a reduction in mortality (RR = 1.15; 95%CI 0.89, 1.51), a reduction in death and neurological disability (RR = 1.49; 95%CI 1.06, 2.08 for carbamazepine and RR = 0.96; 95%CI 0.72, 1.26 for phenytoin) or a reduction in late seizures (pooled RR = 1.28; 95%CI 0.90, 1.81). The pooled relative risk for skin rashes was 1.57 (95%CI 0.57, 39.88).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Prophylactic anti-epileptics are effective in reducing early seizures, but there is no evidence that treatment with prophylactic anti-epileptics reduces the occurrence of late seizures, or has any effect on death and neurological disability. Insufficient evidence is available to establish the net benefit of prophylactic treatment at any time after injury.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Brain Injuries; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures
PubMed: 22696316
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000173.pub2