Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País como asunto
Tipo del documento
Publication year range
1.
Lancet ; 393(10186): 2125-2134, 2019 May 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31005385

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Phenytoin is the recommended second-line intravenous anticonvulsant for treatment of paediatric convulsive status epilepticus in the UK; however, some evidence suggests that levetiracetam could be an effective and safer alternative. This trial compared the efficacy and safety of phenytoin and levetiracetam for second-line management of paediatric convulsive status epilepticus. METHODS: This open-label, randomised clinical trial was undertaken at 30 UK emergency departments at secondary and tertiary care centres. Participants aged 6 months to under 18 years, with convulsive status epilepticus requiring second-line treatment, were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated randomisation schedule to receive levetiracetam (40 mg/kg over 5 min) or phenytoin (20 mg/kg over at least 20 min), stratified by centre. The primary outcome was time from randomisation to cessation of convulsive status epilepticus, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population (excluding those who did not require second-line treatment after randomisation and those who did not provide consent). This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN22567894. FINDINGS: Between July 17, 2015, and April 7, 2018, 1432 patients were assessed for eligibility. After exclusion of ineligible patients, 404 patients were randomly assigned. After exclusion of those who did not require second-line treatment and those who did not consent, 286 randomised participants were treated and had available data: 152 allocated to levetiracetam, and 134 to phenytoin. Convulsive status epilepticus was terminated in 106 (70%) children in the levetiracetam group and in 86 (64%) in the phenytoin group. Median time from randomisation to cessation of convulsive status epilepticus was 35 min (IQR 20 to not assessable) in the levetiracetam group and 45 min (24 to not assessable) in the phenytoin group (hazard ratio 1·20, 95% CI 0·91-1·60; p=0·20). One participant who received levetiracetam followed by phenytoin died as a result of catastrophic cerebral oedema unrelated to either treatment. One participant who received phenytoin had serious adverse reactions related to study treatment (hypotension considered to be immediately life-threatening [a serious adverse reaction] and increased focal seizures and decreased consciousness considered to be medically significant [a suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction]). INTERPRETATION: Although levetiracetam was not significantly superior to phenytoin, the results, together with previously reported safety profiles and comparative ease of administration of levetiracetam, suggest it could be an appropriate alternative to phenytoin as the first-choice, second-line anticonvulsant in the treatment of paediatric convulsive status epilepticus. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.


Asunto(s)
Anticonvulsivantes/administración & dosificación , Levetiracetam/administración & dosificación , Fenitoína/administración & dosificación , Estado Epiléptico/tratamiento farmacológico , Adolescente , Anticonvulsivantes/efectos adversos , Niño , Preescolar , Esquema de Medicación , Epilepsia Refractaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Levetiracetam/efectos adversos , Masculino , Fenitoína/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reino Unido
2.
Eye (Lond) ; 33(9): 1485-1493, 2019 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30996338

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: We conduct supplementary analyses of the NEI VFQ-25 data to evaluate where changes occurred within subscales of the NEI VFQ-25 leading to change in the composite scores between the three treatment arms, and evaluate the NEI VFQ-25 with and without the Neuro 10 supplement. METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, parallel, single-blind, three-arm RCT of fourteen UK acute stroke units was conducted. Stroke survivors with homonymous hemianopia were recruited. Interventions included: Fresnel prisms for minimum 2 h, 5 days/week over 6-weeks (Arm a), Visual search training for minimum 30 min, 5 days/week over 6-weeks (Arm b) and standard care-information only (Arm c). Primary and secondary outcomes (including NEI VFQ-25 data) were measured at baseline, 6, 12 and 26 weeks after randomisation. RESULTS: Eighty seven patients were recruited (69% male; mean age (SD) equal to 69 (12) years). At 26 weeks, outcomes for 24, 24 and 22 patients, respectively, were compared to baseline. NEI VFQ-25 (with and without Neuro 10) responses improved from baseline to 26 weeks with visual search training compared to Fresnel prisms and standard care. In subscale analysis, the most impacted across all treatment arms was 'driving' whilst the least impacted were 'colour vision' and 'ocular pain'. CONCLUSIONS: Composite scores differed systematically for the NEI VFQ-25 (Neuro 10) versus NEI VFQ-25 at all time points. For subscale scores, descriptive statistics suggest clinically relevant improvement in distance activities and vision-specific dependency subscales for NEI VFQ-25 scores in the visual search treatment arm. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN05956042.


Asunto(s)
Hemianopsia/fisiopatología , Perfil de Impacto de Enfermedad , Agudeza Visual/fisiología , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Método Simple Ciego , Accidente Cerebrovascular/fisiopatología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Campos Visuales/fisiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
Detalles de la búsqueda