Efficacy of Levetiracetam versus Phenytoin in Neonatal Seizure in Rural Area of Thailand

Q4 Medicine
{"title":"Efficacy of Levetiracetam versus Phenytoin in Neonatal Seizure in Rural Area of Thailand","authors":"","doi":"10.35755/jmedassocthai.2023.08.13877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Neonatal seizure is an emergency condition that affects neurodevelopment and mortality. The appropriate treatment and seizure termination is crucial. Previous studies determined the efficacy of different types of antiseizure medications (ASMs), but there is no consensus toward second-line ASMs in neonatal seizure.\n\nObjective: To compare the efficacy of second-line ASMs in neonatal seizure, compared between levetiracetam and phenytoin.\n\nMaterials and Methods: The present study was a retrospective study. The author recruited patients with diagnosis of neonatal seizure admitted at Maharat Nakhon Ratchasima Hospital, Thailand, between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020. Patients who had clinical seizure refractory and were given first-line ASM (intravenous phenobarbital) and received second-line ASMs as intravenous levetiracetam or intravenous phenytoin were included. Etiologies of seizure, seizure types, and other demographic data were recorded. The efficacy of levetiracetam and phenytoin were determined by comparing the duration of seizure, the need for third-line ASMs, and morbidity as developmental outcome, diagnosis of cerebral palsy, and mortality rate.\n\nResults: Twenty-five patients (68% male) were recruited. Sixty-four percent were diagnosed with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE). The most common seizure type was subtle seizure at 56%. Levetiracetam was given to 56% and phenytoin was given to 44% as second-line ASMs. The duration of seizure was significantly different at 28.12 minutes in levetiracetam and 42.72 minutes in phenytoin (p=0.01). The drug adherence was higher in the levetiracetam group. Regarding third-line ASMs, 28.7% of the levetiracetam group and 45.45% of phenytoin group needed third-line ASMs, but this was not statistically significant. Mortality was 20% and 48% were diagnosed as cerebral palsy. There was no significant difference in mortality and morbidity between the two groups.\n\nConclusion: Levetiracetam had no superior efficacy than phenytoin in neonatal seizure.\n\nKeywords: Neonatal seizure; Levetiracetam; Phenytoin; Efficacy","PeriodicalId":17486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35755/jmedassocthai.2023.08.13877","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Neonatal seizure is an emergency condition that affects neurodevelopment and mortality. The appropriate treatment and seizure termination is crucial. Previous studies determined the efficacy of different types of antiseizure medications (ASMs), but there is no consensus toward second-line ASMs in neonatal seizure. Objective: To compare the efficacy of second-line ASMs in neonatal seizure, compared between levetiracetam and phenytoin. Materials and Methods: The present study was a retrospective study. The author recruited patients with diagnosis of neonatal seizure admitted at Maharat Nakhon Ratchasima Hospital, Thailand, between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020. Patients who had clinical seizure refractory and were given first-line ASM (intravenous phenobarbital) and received second-line ASMs as intravenous levetiracetam or intravenous phenytoin were included. Etiologies of seizure, seizure types, and other demographic data were recorded. The efficacy of levetiracetam and phenytoin were determined by comparing the duration of seizure, the need for third-line ASMs, and morbidity as developmental outcome, diagnosis of cerebral palsy, and mortality rate. Results: Twenty-five patients (68% male) were recruited. Sixty-four percent were diagnosed with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE). The most common seizure type was subtle seizure at 56%. Levetiracetam was given to 56% and phenytoin was given to 44% as second-line ASMs. The duration of seizure was significantly different at 28.12 minutes in levetiracetam and 42.72 minutes in phenytoin (p=0.01). The drug adherence was higher in the levetiracetam group. Regarding third-line ASMs, 28.7% of the levetiracetam group and 45.45% of phenytoin group needed third-line ASMs, but this was not statistically significant. Mortality was 20% and 48% were diagnosed as cerebral palsy. There was no significant difference in mortality and morbidity between the two groups. Conclusion: Levetiracetam had no superior efficacy than phenytoin in neonatal seizure. Keywords: Neonatal seizure; Levetiracetam; Phenytoin; Efficacy
左乙拉西坦与苯妥英在泰国农村新生儿癫痫发作中的疗效比较
背景:新生儿癫痫是一种影响神经发育和死亡率的急症。适当的治疗和癫痫的终止是至关重要的。先前的研究确定了不同类型的抗癫痫药物(asm)的疗效,但对于二线抗癫痫药物在新生儿癫痫发作中的应用尚无共识。目的:比较左乙拉西坦与苯妥英在新生儿癫痫发作中的疗效。材料与方法:本研究为回顾性研究。作者招募了2018年1月1日至2020年12月31日期间在泰国Maharat Nakhon Ratchasima医院入院的诊断为新生儿癫痫发作的患者。包括临床发作难治性患者,给予一线静脉注射苯巴比妥,并接受二线静脉注射左乙拉西坦或苯妥英等ASM。记录癫痫发作的病因、发作类型和其他人口统计学数据。左乙西坦和苯妥英的疗效是通过比较癫痫发作的持续时间、三线抗痉挛药物的需要、作为发育结局的发病率、脑瘫的诊断和死亡率来确定的。结果:招募了25例患者(68%为男性)。其中64%被诊断为缺氧缺血性脑病(HIE)。最常见的发作类型为轻微发作,占56%。左乙拉西坦占56%,苯妥英占44%。癫痫发作时间左乙拉西坦为28.12 min,苯妥英为42.72 min,两者差异有统计学意义(p=0.01)。左乙拉西坦组药物依从性较高。在三线asm方面,28.7%的左乙拉西坦组和45.45%的苯妥英组需要三线asm,但差异无统计学意义。死亡率为20%,诊断为脑瘫的占48%。两组患者的死亡率和发病率无显著差异。结论:左乙拉西坦治疗新生儿癫痫发作的疗效不优于苯妥英。关键词:新生儿癫痫发作;Levetiracetam;苯妥英;功效
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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