Levetiracetam versus carbamazepine monotherapy in the management of pediatric focal epilepsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

被引:0
|
作者
Martins, Jefferson Manoel Borges [1 ]
Vieira, Paula Larissa Ferreira [1 ]
Gosch Berton, Giovanni [2 ,3 ]
Karlinski Vizentin, Vanessa [4 ]
dos Santos Borges, Rafael [5 ]
Chaves Vieira, Ana Livia [1 ]
Sefer, Celina Claudia Israel [6 ]
Chermont, Aurimery Gomes [1 ]
机构
[1] Fed Univ, Div Med, Belem, PA, Brazil
[2] Univ Padua, Sch Med, Dept Med, Osped Civile St 77, I-35121 Padua, Italy
[3] Univ Passo Fundo, Sch Med, Passo Fundo, RS, Brazil
[4] Mayo Clin Rochester, Dept Cardiovasc Dis, Rochester, MN USA
[5] Univ Fed Minas Gerais, Div Med, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil
[6] Metropolitan Univ Ctr Amazon, Div Med, Belem, PA, Brazil
关键词
Focal epilepsy; Pediatric; Levetiracetam; Carbamazepine; Monotherapy; CHILDREN;
D O I
10.1007/s00431-024-05768-0
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Levetiracetam (LEV) and carbamazepine (CBZ) are effective monotherapies for focal epilepsy in children. However, the best drug remains controversial. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing LEV and CBZ monotherapy in the management of pediatric focal epilepsy (PFE). We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published until February 2024 comparing LEV and CBZ monotherapy in PFE. Statistical analysis was performed using R version 4.2.2, heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics, and the risk of bias was evaluated using the RoB-2 tool. Risk Ratios (RR) with p < 0.05 were considered significant. The outcomes of interest were seizure freedom, any adverse events, adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation, dermatologic adverse events, and the frequency of at least one seizure, defined as the proportion of patients experiencing one or more seizures during the treatment period. Four RCTs comprising 381 children with a mean age of 7.32 to 9.28 years were included, of whom 186 (48.8%) received LEV monotherapy. There was no significant difference between groups (RR: 1.15; 95% CI 0.88-1.50; p = 0.31; I2 = 90%) regarding seizure freedom. The frequency of at least one seizure (RR: 0.71; 95% CI 0.52-0.97; p = 0.03; I2 = 8%) and dermatologic adverse events (RR: 0.24; 95% CI 0.09-0.64; p < 0.01; I2 = 0%) were both significantly lower in the LEV group. There were no significant differences in the presence of any adverse events (RR: 0.58; 95% CI 0.33-1.01; p = 0.05; I2 = 36%) or adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation (RR: 0.67; 95% CI 0.13-3.42; p = 0.63; I2 = 30%). Conclusion: In monotherapy, LEV was more advantageous than CBZ for PFE, with a lower frequency of seizures and fewer dermatological adverse events. However, both drugs are equally effective in achieving seizure freedom, adverse events without specification, and those that lead to treatment discontinuation. Our findings have important implications for clinical practice and decision-making in this condition.
引用
收藏
页码:4623 / 4633
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Laparoscopic versus robotic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Imsirovic, Anja
    Nyame, Sandra A.
    Miles, William F. A.
    Sains, Parv
    Singh, Krishna K.
    Sajid, Muhammad S.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2019, 106 : 73 - 73
  • [22] Monovision Versus Multifocality for Presbyopia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Kelava, Lidija
    Baric, Hrvoje
    Busic, Mladen
    Cima, Ivan
    Trkulja, Vladimir
    ADVANCES IN THERAPY, 2017, 34 (08) : 1815 - 1839
  • [23] Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials versus placebo
    Gougain, Marion
    Coquelle, Elise
    Moreau, Alain
    Boussageon, Remy
    Pickering, Gisele
    Fauvel, Jean-Pierre
    Gueyffier, Francois
    EXERCER-LA REVUE FRANCOPHONE DE MEDECINE GENERALE, 2020, (161): : 124 - 132
  • [24] Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Zhu, Gui-Qi
    Zou, Zhuo-Lin
    Zheng, Ji-Na
    Chen, Da-Zhi
    Zou, Tian-Tian
    Shi, Ke-Qing
    Zheng, Ming-Hua
    MEDICINE, 2016, 95 (09)
  • [25] Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Randomized Controlled Trials in Cytopathology
    AbdullGaffar, Badr
    ACTA CYTOLOGICA, 2012, 56 (03) : 221 - 227
  • [26] injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Daou, Marietou
    Dionne, Joanna C.
    Teng, Jennifer F. T.
    Taran, Shaurya
    Zytaruk, Nicole
    Cook, Deborah
    Wilcox, M. Elizabeth
    JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, 2022, 71
  • [27] Tranexamic acid versus misoprostol for management of postpartum hemorrhage: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Abu-Zaid, Ahmed
    Baradwan, Saeed
    Albouq, Bayan
    Ghazi, Ahmed
    Khadawardi, Khalid
    Bukhari, Ibtihal Abdulaziz
    Alyousef, Abdullah
    Abdulmalik, Nadia Ahmed
    Alblewi, Hedaya
    Alsehaimi, Saud Owaimer
    Albadawi, Mohamed Ismail
    Abuzaid, Mohammed
    Alomar, Osama
    Salem, Hany
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2023, 291 : 61 - 69
  • [28] A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the management of ventral hernia: biologic versus synthetic mesh
    Alzahrani, Anas
    Alhindi, Nawaf
    Alotaibi, Sultan
    Alzibali, Khalid
    Alaqla, Abdullah Ali
    Alzahrani, Saleh
    Alsallat, Iram Mamdouh
    Ghunaim, Mohammed
    Alharthi, Mohammed
    UPDATES IN SURGERY, 2024, 76 (08) : 2725 - 2731
  • [29] Risk of bleeding associated with BTK inhibitor monotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Jiang, Dan
    Song, Zaiwei
    Hu, Yang
    Dong, Fei
    Zhao, Rongsheng
    EXPERT REVIEW OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2022, 15 (08) : 987 - 996
  • [30] Efficacy of rasagiline monotherapy for early Parkinson disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Chang, Hao-Yun
    Li, Ying-Yu
    Hong, Chien-Tai
    Kuan, Yi-Chun
    JOURNAL OF PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2022, 36 (06) : 704 - 714