-
Neurotherapeutics : the Journal of the... Oct 2020Essential tremor is one of the most common tremor syndromes. According to the recent tremor classification, tremor as a symptom is defined as an involuntary, rhythmic,... (Review)
Review
Essential tremor is one of the most common tremor syndromes. According to the recent tremor classification, tremor as a symptom is defined as an involuntary, rhythmic, oscillatory movement of a body part and is classified along two axes: axis 1-defining syndromes based on the clinical features such as historical features, tremor characteristics, associated signs, and laboratory tests; and axis 2-classifying the etiology (Bhatia et al., Mov Disord 33:75-87, 2018). The management of this condition has two major approaches. The first is to exclude treatable etiologies, as particularly during the onset of this condition the presentation of a variety of etiologies can be with monosymptomatic tremor. Once the few etiologies with causal treatments are excluded, all further treatment is symptomatic. Shared decision-making with enabling the patient to knowledgeably choose treatment options is needed to customize the management. Mild to moderate tremor severity can sometimes be controlled with occupational treatment, speech therapy of psychotherapy, or adaptation of coping strategy. First-line pharmacological treatments include symptomatic treatment with propranolol, primidone, and topiramate. Botulinum toxin is for selected cases. Invasive treatments for essential tremor should be considered for severe tremors. They are generally accepted as the most powerful interventions and provide not only improvement of tremor but also a significant improvement of life quality. The current standard is deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the thalamic and subthalamic region. Focused ultrasound thalamotomy is a new therapy attracting increasing interest. Radiofrequency lesioning is only rarely done if DBS or focused ultrasound is not possible. Radiosurgery is not well established. We present our treatment algorithm.
Topics: Behavior Therapy; Botulinum Toxins; Deep Brain Stimulation; Diagnosis, Differential; Disease Management; Essential Tremor; Humans; Occupational Therapy; Radiosurgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32915385
DOI: 10.1007/s13311-020-00899-2 -
Epileptic Disorders : International... Dec 2014Interactions between antiepileptic drugs, or between antiepileptic drugs and other drugs, can be pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic in nature. Pharmacokinetic... (Review)
Review
Interactions between antiepileptic drugs, or between antiepileptic drugs and other drugs, can be pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic in nature. Pharmacokinetic interactions involve changes in absorption, distribution or elimination, whereas pharmacodynamic interactions involve synergism and antagonism at the site of action. Most clinically important interactions of antiepileptic drugs result from induction or inhibition of drug metabolism. Carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital and primidone are strong inducers of cytochrome P450 and glucuronizing enzymes (as well as P-glycoprotein) and can reduce the efficacy of co-administered medications such as oral anticoagulants, calcium antagonists, steroids, antimicrobial and antineoplastic drugs through this mechanism. Oxcarbazepine, eslicarbazepine acetate, felbamate, rufinamide, topiramate (at doses ≥ 200 mg/day) and perampanel (at doses ≥ 8 mg/day) have weaker inducing properties, and a lower propensity to cause interactions mediated by enzyme induction. Unlike enzyme induction, enzyme inhibition results in decreased metabolic clearance of the affected drug, the serum concentration of which may increase leading to toxic effects. Examples of important interactions mediated by enzyme inhibition include the increase in the serum concentration of phenobarbital and lamotrigine caused by valproic acid. There are also interactions whereby other drugs induce or inhibit the metabolism of antiepileptic drugs, examples being the increase in serum carbamazepine concentration by erythromycin, and the decrease in serum lamotrigine concentration by oestrogen-containing contraceptives. Pharmacodynamic interactions between antiepileptic drugs may also be clinically important. These interactions can have potentially beneficial effects, such as the therapeutic synergism of valproic acid combined with lamotrigine, or adverse effects, such as the reciprocal potentiation of neurotoxicity observed in patients treated with a combination of sodium channel blocking antiepileptic drugs.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Drug Interactions; Epilepsy; Humans
PubMed: 25515681
DOI: 10.1684/epd.2014.0714 -
BMJ Open Jul 2017Compare the safety of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) on neurodevelopment of infants/children exposed in utero or during breast feeding. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparative safety of antiepileptic drugs for neurological development in children exposed during pregnancy and breast feeding: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
Compare the safety of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) on neurodevelopment of infants/children exposed in utero or during breast feeding.
DESIGN AND SETTING
Systematic review and Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA). MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched until 27 April 2017. Screening, data abstraction and quality appraisal were completed in duplicate by independent reviewers.
PARTICIPANTS
29 cohort studies including 5100 infants/children.
INTERVENTIONS
Monotherapy and polytherapy AEDs including first-generation (carbamazepine, clobazam, clonazepam, ethosuximide, phenobarbital, phenytoin, primidone, valproate) and newer-generation (gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, topiramate, vigabatrin) AEDs. Epileptic women who did not receive AEDs during pregnancy or breast feeding served as the control group.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES
Cognitive developmental delay and autism/dyspraxia were primary outcomes. Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, language delay, neonatal seizures, psychomotor developmental delay and social impairment were secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
The NMA on cognitive developmental delay (11 cohort studies, 933 children, 18 treatments) suggested that among all AEDs only valproate was statistically significantly associated with more children experiencing cognitive developmental delay compared with control (OR=7.40, 95% credible interval (CrI) 3.00 to 18.46). The NMA on autism (5 cohort studies, 2551 children, 12 treatments) suggested that oxcarbazepine (OR 13.51, CrI 1.28 to 221.40), valproate (OR 17.29, 95% CrI 2.40 to 217.60), lamotrigine (OR 8.88, CrI 1.28 to 112.00) and lamotrigine+valproate (OR 132.70, CrI 7.41 to 3851.00) were associated with significantly greater odds of developing autism compared with control. The NMA on psychomotor developmental delay (11 cohort studies, 1145 children, 18 treatments) found that valproate (OR 4.16, CrI 2.04 to 8.75) and carbamazepine+phenobarbital+valproate (OR 19.12, CrI 1.49 to 337.50) were associated with significantly greater odds of psychomotor delay compared with control.
CONCLUSIONS
Valproate alone or combined with another AED is associated with the greatest odds of adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes compared with control. Oxcarbazepine and lamotrigine were associated with increased occurrence of autism. Counselling is advised for women considering pregnancy to tailor the safest regimen.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO database (CRD42014008925).
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Autistic Disorder; Bayes Theorem; Breast Feeding; Carbamazepine; Child; Epilepsy; Female; Humans; Lamotrigine; Observational Studies as Topic; Oxcarbazepine; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects; Triazines; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 28729328
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017248 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Dec 2015Essential tremor is one of the most common movement disorders in the world, with prevalence in the general population of 0.4% to 3.9%.
INTRODUCTION
Essential tremor is one of the most common movement disorders in the world, with prevalence in the general population of 0.4% to 3.9%.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic overview, aiming to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of drug treatments in people with essential tremor of the hand? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to January 2014 (Clinical Evidence overviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this overview).
RESULTS
At this update, searching of electronic databases retrieved 56 studies. After deduplication and removal of conference abstracts, 31 records were screened for inclusion in the overview. Appraisal of titles and abstracts led to the exclusion of 18 studies and the further review of 13 full publications. Of the 13 full articles evaluated, two RCTs were added at this update. We performed a GRADE evaluation for 11 PICO combinations.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic overview, we categorised the efficacy for 13 interventions based on information about the effectiveness and safety of alprazolam, beta-blockers other than propranolol, botulinum A toxin-haemagglutinin complex, clonazepam, diazepam, gabapentin, levetiracetam, lorazepam, phenobarbital, primidone, propranolol, sodium oxybate, and topiramate.
PubMed: 26678329
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2016There is evidence that certain antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are teratogenic and are associated with an increased risk of congenital malformation. The majority of women... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There is evidence that certain antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are teratogenic and are associated with an increased risk of congenital malformation. The majority of women with epilepsy continue taking AEDs throughout pregnancy; therefore it is important that comprehensive information on the potential risks associated with AED treatment is available.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of prenatal exposure to AEDs on the prevalence of congenital malformations in the child.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (September 2015), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 11), MEDLINE (via Ovid) (1946 to September 2015), EMBASE (1974 to September 2015), Pharmline (1978 to September 2015), Reprotox (1983 to September 2015) and conference abstracts (2010-2015) without language restriction.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included prospective cohort controlled studies, cohort studies set within pregnancy registries and randomised controlled trials. Participants were women with epilepsy taking AEDs; the two control groups were women without epilepsy and women with epilepsy who were not taking AEDs during pregnancy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three authors independently selected studies for inclusion. Five authors completed data extraction and risk of bias assessments. The primary outcome was the presence of a major congenital malformation. Secondary outcomes included specific types of major congenital malformations. Where meta-analysis was not possible, we reviewed included studies narratively.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 50 studies, with 31 contributing to meta-analysis. Study quality varied, and given the observational design, all were at high risk of certain biases. However, biases were balanced across the AEDs investigated and we believe that the results are not explained by these biases.Children exposed to carbamazepine (CBZ) were at a higher risk of malformation than children born to women without epilepsy (N = 1367 vs 2146, risk ratio (RR) 2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20 to 3.36) and women with untreated epilepsy (N = 3058 vs 1287, RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.19). Children exposed to phenobarbital (PB) were at a higher risk of malformation than children born to women without epilepsy (N = 345 vs 1591, RR 2.84, 95% CI 1.57 to 5.13). Children exposed to phenytoin (PHT) were at an increased risk of malformation compared with children born to women without epilepsy (N = 477 vs 987, RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.03) and to women with untreated epilepsy (N = 640 vs 1256, RR 2.40, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.08). Children exposed to topiramate (TPM) were at an increased risk of malformation compared with children born to women without epilepsy (N = 359 vs 442, RR 3.69, 95% CI 1.36 to 10.07). The children exposed to valproate (VPA) were at a higher risk of malformation compared with children born to women without epilepsy (N = 467 vs 1936, RR 5.69, 95% CI 3.33 to 9.73) and to women with untreated epilepsy (N = 1923 vs 1259, RR 3.13, 95% CI 2.16 to 4.54). There was no increased risk for major malformation for lamotrigine (LTG). Gabapentin (GBP), levetiracetam (LEV), oxcarbazepine (OXC), primidone (PRM) or zonisamide (ZNS) were not associated with an increased risk, however, there were substantially fewer data for these medications.For AED comparisons, children exposed to VPA had the greatest risk of malformation (10.93%, 95% CI 8.91 to 13.13). Children exposed to VPA were at an increased risk of malformation compared with children exposed to CBZ (N = 2529 vs 4549, RR 2.44, 95% CI 2.00 to 2.94), GBP (N = 1814 vs 190, RR 6.21, 95% CI 1.91 to 20.23), LEV (N = 1814 vs 817, RR 5.82, 95% CI 3.13 to 10.81), LTG (N = 2021 vs 4164, RR 3.56, 95% CI 2.77 to 4.58), TPM (N = 1814 vs 473, RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.40 to 3.95), OXC (N = 676 vs 238, RR 3.71, 95% CI 1.65 to 8.33), PB (N = 1137 vs 626, RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.29, PHT (N = 2319 vs 1137, RR 2.00, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.71) or ZNS (N = 323 vs 90, RR 17.13, 95% CI 1.06 to 277.48). Children exposed to CBZ were at a higher risk of malformation than those exposed to LEV (N = 3051 vs 817, RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.29) and children exposed to LTG (N = 3385 vs 4164, RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.76). Children exposed to PB were at a higher risk of malformation compared with children exposed to GBP (N = 204 vs 159, RR 8.33, 95% CI 1.04 to 50.00), LEV (N = 204 vs 513, RR 2.33, 95% CI 1.04 to 5.00) or LTG (N = 282 vs 1959, RR 3.13, 95% CI 1.64 to 5.88). Children exposed to PHT had a higher risk of malformation than children exposed to LTG (N = 624 vs 4082, RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.94) or to LEV (N = 566 vs 817, RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.85); however, the comparison to LEV was not significant in the random-effects model. Children exposed to TPM were at a higher risk of malformation than children exposed to LEV (N = 473 vs 817, RR 2.00, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.85) or LTG (N = 473 vs 3975, RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.94). There were no other significant differences, or comparisons were limited to a single study.We found significantly higher rates of specific malformations associating PB exposure with cardiac malformations and VPA exposure with neural tube, cardiac, oro-facial/craniofacial, and skeletal and limb malformations in comparison to other AEDs. Dose of exposure mediated the risk of malformation following VPA exposure; a potential dose-response association for the other AEDs remained less clear.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Exposure in the womb to certain AEDs carried an increased risk of malformation in the foetus and may be associated with specific patterns of malformation. Based on current evidence, LEV and LTG exposure carried the lowest risk of overall malformation; however, data pertaining to specific malformations are lacking. Physicians should discuss both the risks and treatment efficacy with the patient prior to commencing treatment.
Topics: Abnormalities, Drug-Induced; Anticonvulsants; Cardiovascular Abnormalities; Craniofacial Abnormalities; Epilepsy; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Musculoskeletal Abnormalities; Neural Tube Defects; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications
PubMed: 27819746
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010224.pub2 -
Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) Jun 2023Adverse effects of antiseizure medications (ASMs) remain one of the major causes of non-adherence. Cosmetic side effects (CSEs) are among the most commonly reported... (Review)
Review
Adverse effects of antiseizure medications (ASMs) remain one of the major causes of non-adherence. Cosmetic side effects (CSEs) are among the most commonly reported side effects of ASMs. In this context, alopecia is one of the CSEs that has a high intolerance rate leading to poor therapeutical compliance. We performed a literature review concerning alopecia as a secondary effect of ASMs. There are 1656 individuals reported with ASM-induced alopecia. Valproate (983), lamotrigine (355), and carbamazepine (225) have been extensively reported. Other ASMs associated with alopecia were cenobamate (18), levetiracetam (14), topiramate (13), lacosamide (7), vigabatrin (6), phenobarbital (5), gabapentin (5), phenytoin (4), pregabalin (4), eslicarbazepine (3), brivaracetam (2), clobazam (2), perampanel (2), trimethadione (2), rufinamide (2), zonisamide (2), primidone (1), and tiagabine (1). There were no reports of oxcarbazepine and felbamate with drug-induced alopecia. Hair loss seen with ASMs was diffuse and non-scarring. Telogen effluvium was the most common cause of alopecia. A characteristic feature was the reversibility of alopecia after ASM dose adjustment. Alopecia should be considered one important adverse effect of ASMs. Patients reporting hair loss with ASM therapy should be further investigated, and specialist consultation is recommended.
PubMed: 37367730
DOI: 10.3390/medicines10060035