Suppr超能文献

左乙拉西坦与(磷)苯妥英钠治疗癫痫持续状态二线治疗的疗效和安全性:最新随机对照试验的荟萃分析。

Efficacy and safety of levetiracetam versus (fos)phenytoin for second-line treatment of epilepticus: a meta-analysis of latest randomized controlled trials.

机构信息

School of Life and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Dalian University of Technology, Panjin 124221, China.

Translational Medicine Research Institute, College of Medicine, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225001, China.

出版信息

Seizure. 2021 Oct;91:339-345. doi: 10.1016/j.seizure.2021.07.012. Epub 2021 Jul 13.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficiency and safety profiles of levetiracetam and (fos)phenytoin (phenytoin or fosphenytoin) for second-line treatment of seizures by performing a meta-analysis of RCTs.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, FDA.gov, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs (published before July 31, 2020; no language restrictions). Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and titles against inclusion and exclusion criteria published previously in the PROSPERO: CRD42020202736. Eleven studies fulfilled the established criteria. We assessed pooled data by using a random-effects model. Quality analysis was performed by using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2). RevMan v.5.3 was used to perform statistical analyses, and publication bias (egger's test) was assessed with Stata MP v.14.0.

RESULTS

Levetiracetam was similar to (fos)phenytoin in seizure termination rate (risk ratio [RR] 0.94; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.01), time of seizure termination (mean difference [MD] 0.44; -0.60 to 1.49), and drug resistance ([RR] 1.12, 0.86 to 1.45). The safety outcome showed a significant statistical difference between fosphenytoin group and levetiracetam group ([RR] 1.44, 1.14 to 1.81), while there was no significant difference observed between phenytoin treatment and levetiracetam treatment ([RR] 1.26, 0.99 to 1.60).

CONCLUSION

Levetiracetam was similar to (fos)phenytoin in cessation rate convulsive status epilepticus, and drug resistance, while it was superior (fos)phenytoin in pooled safety outcome. Further exploration is still needed as to whether it is the first choice for second-line drugs.

摘要

目的

通过对随机对照试验进行荟萃分析,评估左乙拉西坦和(磷)苯妥英(苯妥英或磷苯妥英)作为二线治疗癫痫发作的疗效和安全性。

方法

我们系统地检索了 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane、FDA.gov 和 ClinicalTrials.gov 中的 RCTs(发表时间截至 2020 年 7 月 31 日;无语言限制)。两名独立的审查员根据先前在 PROSPERO 中公布的纳入和排除标准筛选摘要和标题:CRD42020202736。11 项研究符合既定标准。我们使用随机效应模型评估汇总数据。使用 Cochrane 风险偏倚工具版本 2(RoB 2)进行质量分析。使用 RevMan v.5.3 进行统计分析,并使用 Stata MP v.14.0 评估发表偏倚(egger 检验)。

结果

左乙拉西坦在癫痫发作终止率(风险比 [RR] 0.94;95%CI 0.87 至 1.01)、癫痫发作终止时间(平均差异 [MD] 0.44;-0.60 至 1.49)和耐药性方面与(磷)苯妥英相似(RR 1.12,0.86 至 1.45)。安全性结果显示,磷苯妥英组与左乙拉西坦组之间存在显著的统计学差异(RR 1.44,1.14 至 1.81),而苯妥英治疗与左乙拉西坦治疗之间无显著差异(RR 1.26,0.99 至 1.60)。

结论

左乙拉西坦在癫痫持续状态的终止率和耐药性方面与(磷)苯妥英相似,而在安全性方面优于(磷)苯妥英。是否将其作为二线药物的首选仍需进一步探讨。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验