Offringa Martin, Newton Richard, Cozijnsen Martinus A, Nevitt Sarah J
Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, Canada, M5G 1X8.
Department of Paediatric Neurology, Royal Manchester Children's Hospital, Hospital Road, Pendlebury, Manchester, UK, M27 4HA.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 22;2(2):CD003031. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003031.pub3.
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.
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.
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 We also contacted researchers in the field to identify continuing or unpublished studies.
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.
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.
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.
在英国和美国,1个月以上儿童发热时发生的热性惊厥影响2%至4%的儿童,其中30%会复发。在随后的发热发作期间给予速效抗癫痫药和退烧药已被用于避免持续使用抗癫痫药物的不良反应。
主要评估预防性使用抗癫痫和退烧药物治疗热性惊厥儿童的有效性和安全性;同时评估任何其他有合理生物学依据使用的药物干预措施。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(《Cochrane图书馆》2016年第7期);MEDLINE(1966年至2016年7月);Embase(1966年至2016年7月);有效性评价文摘数据库(DARE)(2016年7月)。我们未设语言限制。我们还联系了该领域的研究人员以识别正在进行或未发表的研究。
采用随机或半随机参与者分配的试验,比较抗癫痫药、退烧药或其他合理药物与安慰剂或不治疗的使用情况。
两位综述作者(RN和MO)独立应用预定义标准选择纳入试验,并提取预定义的相关数据,记录随机化、盲法和排除标准的方法。在2016年更新时,第三位作者(MC)检查了所有原始纳入研究、数据分析,并更新了检索。评估的结局是干预组和非干预组在6、12、18、24、36和48个月以及5至6岁时的癫痫复发情况,以及药物不良反应。我们使用漏斗图评估发表偏倚的存在情况。
我们纳入了40篇文章,描述了30项随机试验,共4256名随机参与者。我们分析了13种持续或间歇预防性干预措施及其对照治疗。大多数研究的方法学质量为中等至较差。我们发现,与安慰剂或不治疗相比,间歇使用苯巴比妥、苯妥英、丙戊酸、吡哆醇、布洛芬或硫酸锌没有显著益处;双氯芬酸与安慰剂相比,随后使用布洛芬、对乙酰氨基酚或安慰剂也没有显著益处;持续使用苯巴比妥与地西泮相比、间歇直肠给予地西泮与间歇使用丙戊酸相比、口服地西泮与氯巴占相比也没有显著益处。与安慰剂或不治疗相比,间歇使用地西泮可显著降低热性惊厥复发率,6个月时风险比(RR)为0.64(95%置信区间(CI)0.48至0.85),12个月时RR为0.69(95%CI 0.56至0.84),1十八个月时RR为0.37(95%CI 0.23至0.60),24个月时RR为0.73(95%CI 0.56至0.95),36个月时RR为0.58(95%CI 0.40至0.85),48个月时RR为0.36(95%CI 0.15至0.89),60至72个月时无益处。苯巴比妥与安慰剂或不治疗相比,在6、12和24个月时可减少癫痫发作,但在18个月或72个月随访时未减少(6个月时RR为0.59(95%CI 0.42至0.83);12个月时RR为0.54(95%CI 0.42至0.70);24个月时RR为0.69(95%CI 0.53至0.89))。与6个月时的安慰剂相比,间歇使用氯巴占导致RR为0.36(95%CI 0.20至0.64),这一效果是在对照组极高(83.3%)的复发率基础上发现的,这一结果需要重复验证。不良反应的记录各不相同。两项研究发现苯巴比妥治疗的儿童理解能力得分较低。一般来说,苯巴比妥治疗组高达30%的儿童记录有不良反应,苯二氮䓬类治疗组高达36%。我们在苯巴比妥与安慰剂(八项研究)12个月时的比较荟萃分析中发现了发表偏倚的证据,但在6个月时(六项研究)未发现;在丙戊酸与安慰剂(四项研究)12个月时的比较中也发现了发表偏倚证据,而其他比较因研究数量太少无法识别发表偏倚。大多数纳入综述的抗癫痫药物试验方法学质量等级为低或极低。随机化和分配隐藏方法往往不符合当前标准;治疗与不治疗的比较比治疗与安慰剂的比较更常见,导致明显的偏倚风险。退烧药和锌的试验质量较高。
我们发现,间歇使用地西泮和持续使用苯巴比妥可降低热性惊厥儿童的复发率,不良反应发生率高达30%。一项试验中氯巴占治疗的明显益处需要重复验证才能被判定可靠。鉴于复发性热性惊厥的良性性质以及这些药物不良反应的高发生率,应向家长和家庭提供医疗服务的详细联系方式以及关于复发、急救管理的信息,最重要的是提供该现象良性性质的信息。