Greenhalgh Janette, Weston Jennifer, Dundar Yenal, Nevitt Sarah J, Marson Anthony G
Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Sherrington Building, Ashton Street, Liverpool, UK, L69 3GE.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 23;5(5):CD007286. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007286.pub4.
This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in Issue 3, 2015.The incidence of seizures following supratentorial craniotomy for non-traumatic pathology has been estimated to be between 15% to 20%; however, the risk of experiencing a seizure appears to vary from 3% to 92% over a five-year period. Postoperative seizures can precipitate the development of epilepsy; seizures are most likely to occur within the first month of cranial surgery. The use of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) administered pre- or postoperatively to prevent seizures following cranial surgery has been investigated in a number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
To determine the efficacy and safety of AEDs when used prophylactically in people undergoing craniotomy and to examine which AEDs are most effective.
For the latest update we searched the following databases on 26 June 2017: Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register, the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We did not apply any language restrictions.
We included RCTs of people with no history of epilepsy who were undergoing craniotomy for either therapeutic or diagnostic reasons. We included trials with adequate randomisation methods and concealment; these could either be blinded or unblinded parallel trials. We did not stipulate a minimum treatment period, and we included trials using active drugs or placebo as a control group.
Three review authors (JW, JG, YD) independently selected trials for inclusion and performed data extraction and risk of bias assessments. We resolved any disagreements through discussion. Outcomes investigated included the number of participants experiencing seizures (early (occurring within first week following craniotomy), and late (occurring after first week following craniotomy)), the number of deaths and the number of people experiencing disability and adverse effects. Due to the heterogeneous nature of the trials, we did not combine data from the included trials in a meta-analysis; we presented the findings of the review in narrative format. Visual comparisons of outcomes are presented in forest plots.
We included 10 RCTs (N = 1815), which were published between 1983 and 2015. Three trials compared a single AED (phenytoin) with placebo or no treatment. One three-armed trial compared two AEDs (phenytoin, carbamazepine) with no treatment. A second three-armed trial compared phenytoin, phenobarbital with no treatment. Of these five trials comparing AEDs with placebo or no treatment, two trials reported a statistically significant advantage for AED treatment compared to controls for early seizure occurrence; all other comparisons showed no clear or statistically significant differences between AEDs and control treatment. None of the trials that were head-to-head comparisons of AEDs (phenytoin versus sodium valproate, phenytoin versus phenobarbital, levetiracetam versus phenytoin, zonisamide versus phenobarbital) reported any statistically significant differences between treatments for either early or late seizure occurrence.Incidences of death were reported in only five trials. One trial reported statistically significantly fewer deaths in the carbamazepine and no-treatment groups compared with the phenytoin group after 24 months of treatment, but not after six months of treatment. Incidences of adverse effects of treatment were poorly reported; however, three trials did show that significantly more adverse events occurred on phenytoin compared to valproate, placebo, or no treatment. No trials reported any results relating to functional outcomes such as disability.We considered the evidence to be of low quality for all reported outcomes due to methodological issues and variability of comparisons made in the trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited, low-quality evidence to suggest that AED treatment administered prophylactically is either effective or not effective in the prevention of postcraniotomy (early or late) seizures. The current evidence base is limited due to the different methodologies employed in the trials and inconsistencies in the reporting of outcomes including deaths and adverse events. Further evidence from good-quality, contemporary trials is required in order to assess the clinical effectiveness of prophylactic AED treatment compared to placebo or no treatment, or other AEDs in preventing postcraniotomy seizures in this select group of patients.
这是对先前于2015年第3期发表的Cochrane系统评价的更新版本。幕上开颅手术治疗非创伤性病变后癫痫发作的发生率估计在15%至20%之间;然而,在五年期间癫痫发作的风险似乎在3%至92%之间变化。术后癫痫发作可促使癫痫的发展;癫痫发作最有可能发生在颅脑手术的第一个月内。在多项随机对照试验(RCT)中对术前或术后使用抗癫痫药物(AED)预防颅脑手术后癫痫发作进行了研究。
确定预防性使用AED对接受开颅手术患者的疗效和安全性,并研究哪种AED最有效。
为了进行最新更新,我们于2017年6月26日检索了以下数据库:Cochrane癫痫组专业注册库、Cochrane系统评价数据库、医学期刊数据库、临床试验.gov以及世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)。我们未设置任何语言限制。
我们纳入了因治疗或诊断原因接受开颅手术且无癫痫病史的患者的RCT。我们纳入了具有充分随机化方法和分配隐藏的试验;这些试验可以是盲法或非盲法平行试验。我们未规定最短治疗期,并且纳入了使用活性药物或安慰剂作为对照组的试验。
三位综述作者(JW、JG、YD)独立选择纳入试验,并进行数据提取和偏倚风险评估。我们通过讨论解决了任何分歧。研究的结局包括癫痫发作的参与者数量(早期(开颅手术后第一周内发生)和晚期(开颅手术后第一周后发生))、死亡人数以及出现残疾和不良反应的人数。由于试验的异质性,我们未对纳入试验的数据进行荟萃分析;我们以叙述形式呈现综述结果。结局的可视化比较在森林图中展示。
我们纳入了10项RCT(N = 1815),这些试验发表于1983年至2015年之间。三项试验将单一AED(苯妥英)与安慰剂或不治疗进行了比较。一项三臂试验将两种AED(苯妥英、卡马西平)与不治疗进行了比较。第二项三臂试验将苯妥英、苯巴比妥与不治疗进行了比较。在这五项将AED与安慰剂或不治疗进行比较的试验中,两项试验报告与对照组相比,AED治疗在早期癫痫发作方面具有统计学显著优势;所有其他比较显示AED与对照治疗之间无明确或统计学显著差异。在AED的头对头比较试验(苯妥英与丙戊酸钠、苯妥英与苯巴比妥、左乙拉西坦与苯妥英、唑尼沙胺与苯巴比妥)中,没有一项试验报告在早期或晚期癫痫发作的治疗之间存在任何统计学显著差异。仅五项试验报告了死亡发生率。一项试验报告,治疗24个月后,卡马西平组和不治疗组的死亡人数与苯妥英组相比在统计学上显著更少,但治疗6个月后并非如此。治疗不良反应的发生率报告不佳;然而,三项试验确实表明,与丙戊酸、安慰剂或不治疗相比,苯妥英发生的不良事件明显更多。没有试验报告与残疾等功能结局相关的任何结果。由于方法学问题以及试验中比较的变异性,我们认为所有报告结局的证据质量都很低。
有有限的、低质量的证据表明预防性使用AED在预防开颅手术后(早期或晚期)癫痫发作方面要么有效要么无效。由于试验中采用的不同方法以及包括死亡和不良事件在内的结局报告不一致,当前的证据基础有限。需要来自高质量当代试验的进一步证据,以便评估预防性AED治疗与安慰剂或不治疗或其他AED相比在预防该特定患者群体开颅手术后癫痫发作方面的临床有效性。