Taylor S, Tudur Smith C, Williamson P R, Marson A G
Division of Statistics and Operational Research, Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Peach Street, Liverpool, Merseyside, UK, L69 7ZL.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001(4):CD002217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002217.
Worldwide, phenytoin and phenobarbitone are commonly used antiepileptic drugs. They are more likely to be used in the developing world than the developed world, primarily because they are inexpensive. The aim of this review is to summarise data from existing trials comparing phenytoin and phenobarbitone.
To review the effects of phenobarbitone compared to phenytoin when used as monotherapy in patients with partial onset seizures or generalized tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalized seizure types.
Our search strategy has included: a) MEDLINE 1966 to 1998, b) the controlled trials register of the Cochrane Library, c) hand-searching relevant journals, d) the pharmaceutical industry, e) researchers in the field.
Randomized controlled trials in children or adults with partial onset seizures or generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures. Trials must have included a comparison of phenobarbitone monotherapy with phenytoin monotherapy.
This was an individual patient data review. Outcomes were time to a) withdrawal of allocated treatment, b) 12 month remission, and c) first seizure post randomization. Data were analysed using a stratified logrank analysis with results expressed as hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), where a HR>1 indicates an event is more likely to occur earlier on phenobarbitone than phenytoin.
To date, data have been obtained for four of ten studies meeting the inclusion criteria, amounting to 599 patients, or approximately 65% of the potential data. The main overall results (HR, 95% CI) were: a) time to treatment withdrawal 1.62 (1.22 to 2.14), b) time to 12 month remission 0.93 (0.70 to 1.23), c) time to first seizure 0.84 (0.68 to 1.05). These results indicate a statistically significant clinical advantage for phenytoin in terms of treatment withdrawal and a non-significant advantage in terms of 12 month remission. Results for time to first seizure suggest a non-significant clinical advantage for phenobarbitone.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review favour phenytoin over phenobarbitone, as phenobarbitone was significantly more likely to be withdrawn than phenytoin. Given that no significant differences for seizure outcomes were found, the higher withdrawal rate with phenobarbitone may be due to side effects.
在全球范围内,苯妥英钠和苯巴比妥是常用的抗癫痫药物。与发达国家相比,它们在发展中国家更有可能被使用,主要是因为它们价格低廉。本综述的目的是总结现有比较苯妥英钠和苯巴比妥的试验数据。
回顾在部分性发作或全身强直阵挛性发作(无论有无其他全身性发作类型)患者中,苯巴比妥与苯妥英钠单药治疗的效果比较。
我们的检索策略包括:a)1966年至1998年的MEDLINE,b)Cochrane图书馆的对照试验注册库,c)手工检索相关期刊,d)制药行业,e)该领域的研究人员。
针对部分性发作或全身强直阵挛性发作的儿童或成人进行的随机对照试验。试验必须包括苯巴比妥单药治疗与苯妥英钠单药治疗的比较。
这是一项个体患者数据综述。观察指标为以下各项的时间:a)停止分配治疗,b)12个月缓解,c)随机分组后的首次发作。使用分层对数秩分析对数据进行分析,结果以风险比(HR)和95%置信区间(95%CI)表示,其中HR>1表明苯巴比妥组比苯妥英钠组更易较早发生事件。
迄今为止,在符合纳入标准的十项研究中,有四项已获取数据,涉及599名患者,约占潜在数据的65%。主要总体结果(HR,95%CI)如下:a)停止治疗时间为1.62(1.22至2.14),b)12个月缓解时间为0.93(0.70至1.23),c)首次发作时间为0.84(0.68至1.05)。这些结果表明,在停止治疗方面苯妥英钠具有统计学上显著的临床优势,在12个月缓解方面具有不显著的优势。首次发作时间的结果表明苯巴比妥具有不显著的临床优势。
本综述结果表明苯妥英钠优于苯巴比妥,因为苯巴比妥比苯妥英钠更有可能被停用。鉴于在发作结果方面未发现显著差异,苯巴比妥较高的停药率可能是由于副作用。