{"title":"丙戊酸钠与左乙拉西坦治疗严重创伤性脑损伤的疗效和安全性比较。","authors":"Xiaolei Huang, Wenjia Lin, Jiayin Wang, Chubin Liu, Guan Wei, Jiawei Wang, Chaoyang Wang","doi":"10.1080/00207454.2024.2332959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To observe the efficacy and safety of sodium valproate (VPA) compared to levetiracetam (LEV) in the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this blind, prospective study, eighty-four sTBI patients who had craniotomy from August 2021 to August 2023 were randomly split into two groups through random number table method: LEV and VPA, each with 42 patients. Both received comprehensive treatment post-craniotomy. LEV group: LEV injection on surgery day, transitioning to LEV tablets from day two. VPA group: VPA injection on surgery day, switching to VPA extended-release tablets from day two. The study compared hospital stay, neurological function, clinical outcomes, seizures, and drug reactions between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The length of hospital stay showed no significant difference between the LEV and VPA groups. Both groups demonstrated improved neurological function post-treatment (NIHSS and BI scores), with no significant between-group differences. Clinical outcomes at 3 months post-treatment were similar in both groups. Seizure occurrence within 3 months after treatment showed no significant difference between the LEV (19.05%) and VPA (23.81%) groups. However, the VPA group experienced a significantly higher rate of drug-related adverse reactions (40.48%) compared to the LEV group (21.43%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both VPA and LEV are effective in treating sTBI, showing no significant difference in improving neurological function, daily life abilities, treatment outcomes, and seizure occurrence. However, VPA treatment exhibited a significantly higher incidence of drug-related adverse reactions compared to LEV, indicating that LEV might be a safer option for sTBI treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":14161,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"787-796"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sodium valproate versus levetiracetam in the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaolei Huang, Wenjia Lin, Jiayin Wang, Chubin Liu, Guan Wei, Jiawei Wang, Chaoyang Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00207454.2024.2332959\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To observe the efficacy and safety of sodium valproate (VPA) compared to levetiracetam (LEV) in the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this blind, prospective study, eighty-four sTBI patients who had craniotomy from August 2021 to August 2023 were randomly split into two groups through random number table method: LEV and VPA, each with 42 patients. Both received comprehensive treatment post-craniotomy. LEV group: LEV injection on surgery day, transitioning to LEV tablets from day two. VPA group: VPA injection on surgery day, switching to VPA extended-release tablets from day two. The study compared hospital stay, neurological function, clinical outcomes, seizures, and drug reactions between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The length of hospital stay showed no significant difference between the LEV and VPA groups. Both groups demonstrated improved neurological function post-treatment (NIHSS and BI scores), with no significant between-group differences. Clinical outcomes at 3 months post-treatment were similar in both groups. Seizure occurrence within 3 months after treatment showed no significant difference between the LEV (19.05%) and VPA (23.81%) groups. However, the VPA group experienced a significantly higher rate of drug-related adverse reactions (40.48%) compared to the LEV group (21.43%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both VPA and LEV are effective in treating sTBI, showing no significant difference in improving neurological function, daily life abilities, treatment outcomes, and seizure occurrence. However, VPA treatment exhibited a significantly higher incidence of drug-related adverse reactions compared to LEV, indicating that LEV might be a safer option for sTBI treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"787-796\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00207454.2024.2332959\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00207454.2024.2332959","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的观察丙戊酸钠(VPA)与左乙拉西坦(LEV)治疗严重创伤性脑损伤(sTBI)的疗效和安全性:在这项盲法前瞻性研究中,通过随机数字表法将 2021 年 8 月至 2023 年 8 月期间接受开颅手术的 84 例 sTBI 患者随机分为两组:LEV组和VPA组,每组42名患者。两组患者均在开颅术后接受综合治疗。LEV 组:手术当天注射LEV,第二天起过渡到LEV片剂。VPA 组:手术当天注射 VPA,第二天起改用 VPA 缓释片。研究比较了各组的住院时间、神经功能、临床结果、癫痫发作和药物反应:LEV组和VPA组的住院时间无明显差异。两组患者治疗后的神经功能均有所改善(NIHSS 和 BI 评分),组间差异不显著。两组患者治疗后 3 个月的临床结果相似。LEV 组(19.05%)和 VPA 组(23.81%)在治疗后 3 个月内的癫痫发作率无明显差异。然而,与 LEV 组(21.43%)相比,VPA 组的药物相关不良反应发生率(40.48%)明显更高:结论:VPA和LEV都能有效治疗sTBI,在改善神经功能、日常生活能力、治疗效果和癫痫发作方面没有明显差异。然而,与 LEV 相比,VPA 治疗的药物相关不良反应发生率明显更高,这表明 LEV 可能是治疗 sTBI 更为安全的选择。
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sodium valproate versus levetiracetam in the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury.
Objective: To observe the efficacy and safety of sodium valproate (VPA) compared to levetiracetam (LEV) in the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI).
Methods: In this blind, prospective study, eighty-four sTBI patients who had craniotomy from August 2021 to August 2023 were randomly split into two groups through random number table method: LEV and VPA, each with 42 patients. Both received comprehensive treatment post-craniotomy. LEV group: LEV injection on surgery day, transitioning to LEV tablets from day two. VPA group: VPA injection on surgery day, switching to VPA extended-release tablets from day two. The study compared hospital stay, neurological function, clinical outcomes, seizures, and drug reactions between groups.
Results: The length of hospital stay showed no significant difference between the LEV and VPA groups. Both groups demonstrated improved neurological function post-treatment (NIHSS and BI scores), with no significant between-group differences. Clinical outcomes at 3 months post-treatment were similar in both groups. Seizure occurrence within 3 months after treatment showed no significant difference between the LEV (19.05%) and VPA (23.81%) groups. However, the VPA group experienced a significantly higher rate of drug-related adverse reactions (40.48%) compared to the LEV group (21.43%).
Conclusion: Both VPA and LEV are effective in treating sTBI, showing no significant difference in improving neurological function, daily life abilities, treatment outcomes, and seizure occurrence. However, VPA treatment exhibited a significantly higher incidence of drug-related adverse reactions compared to LEV, indicating that LEV might be a safer option for sTBI treatment.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Neuroscience publishes original research articles, reviews, brief scientific reports, case studies, letters to the editor and book reviews concerned with problems of the nervous system and related clinical studies, epidemiology, neuropathology, medical and surgical treatment options and outcomes, neuropsychology and other topics related to the research and care of persons with neurologic disorders. The focus of the journal is clinical and transitional research. Topics covered include but are not limited to: ALS, ataxia, autism, brain tumors, child neurology, demyelinating diseases, epilepsy, genetics, headache, lysosomal storage disease, mitochondrial dysfunction, movement disorders, multiple sclerosis, myopathy, neurodegenerative diseases, neuromuscular disorders, neuropharmacology, neuropsychiatry, neuropsychology, pain, sleep disorders, stroke, and other areas related to the neurosciences.