Comparative efficacy of intravenous levetiracetam and phenytoin in status epilepticus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

IF 0.5 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Galuh Anis Tasya, Nadhira Iriani Djatmiko, Farhanur Rahman, Vita Kusuma Rahmawati
{"title":"Comparative efficacy of intravenous levetiracetam and phenytoin in status epilepticus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials","authors":"Galuh Anis Tasya, Nadhira Iriani Djatmiko, Farhanur Rahman, Vita Kusuma Rahmawati","doi":"10.13181/mji.oa.236685","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency, with the current guidelines for second-line anticonvulsants may include phenytoin, levetiracetam, valproic acid, and phenobarbital. However, some studies suggest that levetiracetam may be better at stopping seizures in SE. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intravenous (IV) levetiracetam and phenytoin in SE. \nMETHODS We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on administering IV levetiracetam or phenytoin in patients with SE. RCTs were screened using eligibility criteria, and their quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² test, and publication bias was evaluated using Egger’s test. All analyses were performed using Review Manager version 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, UK) and Stata 17 (StataCorp LLC, USA). \nRESULTS 12 RCTs involving 2,137 patients (1,099 receiving levetiracetam) met the inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis showed that levetiracetam therapy had a significantly higher rate of seizure cessation than phenytoin (RR: 1.10, 95% CI = 1.05−1.14, p = 0.02, I² = 51%). Less adverse events were observed in the levetiracetam group (9.34%) than in the phenytoin group (11.62%; RR: 0.82, 95% CI = 0.66–1.02, p = 0.07). However, there was no significant difference regarding IV levetiracetam or phenytoin administration with the incidence of admission to critical care (RR: 1.01; 95% CI = 0.93–1.10, p = 0.80) and mortality (RR: 1.08; 95% CI = 0.54–2.15; p = 0.82). \nCONCLUSIONS IV levetiracetam was significantly better in the cessation of seizures in SE patients than phenytoin.","PeriodicalId":18302,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Indonesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Indonesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13181/mji.oa.236685","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency, with the current guidelines for second-line anticonvulsants may include phenytoin, levetiracetam, valproic acid, and phenobarbital. However, some studies suggest that levetiracetam may be better at stopping seizures in SE. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intravenous (IV) levetiracetam and phenytoin in SE. METHODS We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on administering IV levetiracetam or phenytoin in patients with SE. RCTs were screened using eligibility criteria, and their quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² test, and publication bias was evaluated using Egger’s test. All analyses were performed using Review Manager version 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, UK) and Stata 17 (StataCorp LLC, USA). RESULTS 12 RCTs involving 2,137 patients (1,099 receiving levetiracetam) met the inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis showed that levetiracetam therapy had a significantly higher rate of seizure cessation than phenytoin (RR: 1.10, 95% CI = 1.05−1.14, p = 0.02, I² = 51%). Less adverse events were observed in the levetiracetam group (9.34%) than in the phenytoin group (11.62%; RR: 0.82, 95% CI = 0.66–1.02, p = 0.07). However, there was no significant difference regarding IV levetiracetam or phenytoin administration with the incidence of admission to critical care (RR: 1.01; 95% CI = 0.93–1.10, p = 0.80) and mortality (RR: 1.08; 95% CI = 0.54–2.15; p = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS IV levetiracetam was significantly better in the cessation of seizures in SE patients than phenytoin.
静脉注射左乙拉西坦和苯妥英治疗癫痫持续状态的疗效比较:随机对照试验的系统综述和荟萃分析
背景癫痫持续状态(SE)是一种神经系统紧急情况,目前二线抗惊厥药物的指南可能包括苯妥英钠、左乙拉西坦、丙戊酸和苯巴比妥。然而,一些研究表明,左乙拉西坦可能更能阻止SE患者的癫痫发作。本研究旨在比较静脉注射左乙拉西坦和苯妥英治疗SE的疗效。方法我们在PubMed、ScienceDirect、Cochrane和Google Scholar上搜索了对SE患者静脉注射左甲拉西坦或苯妥英的随机对照试验(RCT)。随机对照试验使用资格标准进行筛选,并使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估其质量。异质性使用I²检验进行评估,发表偏倚使用Egger检验进行评估。所有分析均使用Review Manager 5.4版(英国Cochrane Collaboration)和Stata 17(美国StataCorp LLC)进行。结果12例随机对照试验共2137例(1099例接受左乙拉西坦治疗)符合纳入标准。汇总分析显示,左乙拉西坦治疗的癫痫发作停止率显著高于苯妥英(RR:1.10,95%CI=1.05−1.14,p=0.02,I²=51%)。左乙拉西坦组的不良事件发生率(9.34%)低于苯妥英组(11.62%;RR:0.82,95%CI=0.66–1.02,p=0.07)。然而,静脉注射左乙拉西坦或苯妥英钠与重症监护入院率(RR:1.01;95%CI=0.93–1.10,p=0.80)和死亡率(RR:1.08;95%CI=0.54–2.15;p=0.82)没有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Journal of Indonesia
Medical Journal of Indonesia MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Journal of Indonesia is a peer-reviewed and open access journal that focuses on promoting medical sciences generated from basic sciences, clinical, and community or public health research to integrate researches in all aspects of human health. This journal publishes original articles, reviews, and also interesting case reports. Brief communications containing short features of medicine, latest developments in diagnostic procedures, treatment, or other health issues that is important for the development of health care system are also acceptable. Letters and commentaries of our published articles are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信