Antiepileptic drugs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke

Antiepileptic drugs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke

BACKGROUND

Seizures after stroke are an important clinical problem and may result in poor outcomes. The indications of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for seizure prophylaxis after stroke remain unclear. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of AEDs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. For primary prevention, we aimed to assess whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of seizures in people who have a stroke but do not have a seizure. For secondary prevention, we aimed to assess whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of further seizures in people who have a stroke and at least one post-stroke seizure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 9 March 2021: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to March 08, 2021). CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy and Stroke. We also checked the reference lists of articles retrieved from these searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised and quasi-randomised controlled studies that recruited participants with a clinical diagnosis of stroke, either ischaemic or haemorrhagic. We excluded studies that only recruited participants with subarachnoid haemorrhage, subdural haemorrhage, extradural haemorrhage, or other non-stroke diagnoses such as tumour- or infection-related infarction or haemorrhage. We also excluded studies that recruited only participants who had undergone neurosurgery. We included participants of all ages suffering any seizure type who were assigned to AEDs or placebo groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

In accordance with standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration, two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion before evaluating trial risk of bias and extracting relevant data. The primary outcome assessed was the proportion of participants who experienced seizures in the follow-up period. We presented results as summary risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. Where we had sufficient data, we calculated random-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) meta-analyses for dichotomous outcomes; otherwise, we reported results narratively. We used the I2 statistic to analyse statistical heterogeneity. We planned to use funnel plots to assess publication bias in meta-analyses with at least 10 included studies. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies with a total of 856 subjects were included. AEDs were not shown to be effective in primary prophylaxis of post-stroke seizure (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.26; 2 studies, 856 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The first study was a randomised double-blind study comparing valproic acid with placebo for primary seizure prevention up to one year after stroke. The study included 72 adults with intracerebral haemorrhage. There was no difference in the risk of post-stroke seizures (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.16) or of death (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.58). The second study was a substudy on the use of diazepam in acute stroke. It was a randomised double-blind study, comparing a three-day diazepam treatment versus placebo for primary seizure prevention up to three months after stroke in 784 adults with acute stroke. There was no evidence of a difference in the risk of post-stroke seizures for all stroke or subgroups of haemorrhagic or ischaemic stroke (RR for all stroke 0.47, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.22). In a subgroup analysis of anterior circulation cortical infarcts, primary prophylaxis with diazepam was associated with a reduced risk of post-stroke seizures (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.95). Risks of mortality did not differ between the diazepam and the placebo group at two weeks (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.26) and three months follow-up (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26). We assessed both studies to be at a low overall risk of bias. Using the GRADE approach, we assessed the overall certainty of the evidence as low to moderate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of AEDs on the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. Further well-conducted studies are warranted for this important clinical problem.

Immediate antiepileptic drug treatment, versus placebo, deferred, or no treatment for first unprovoked seizure

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the Cochrane review previously published in 2016. There is considerable disagreement about the risk of recurrence following a first unprovoked epileptic seizure. A decision about whether to start antiepileptic drug treatment following a first seizure should be informed by information on the size of any reduction in risk of future seizures, the impact on long-term seizure remission, and the risk of adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To review the probability of seizure recurrence, seizure remission, mortality, and adverse effects of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment given immediately after the first seizure compared to controls (placebo, deferred treatment, or no treatment) in children and adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to May 24, 2019) on 28 May 2019. There were no language restrictions. The Cochrane Register of Studies includes the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and randomised or quasi-randomised, controlled trials from Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that could be blinded or unblinded. People of any age with a first unprovoked seizure of any type. Included studies compared participants receiving immediate antiepileptic treatment versus those receiving deferred treatment, those assigned to placebo, and those untreated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies identified by the search strategy for inclusion in the review and extracted data. The certainty of the evidence for the outcomes was classified in four categories according to the GRADE approach. Dichotomous outcomes were expressed as Risk Ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Time-to-event outcomes were expressed as Hazard Ratios (HR) with 95% CI. Only one trial used a double-blind design, and the two largest studies were unblinded. Most of the recurrences were generalised tonic-clonic seizures, a major type of seizures that is easily recognised, which should reduce the risk of outcome reporting bias.

MAIN RESULTS

After exclusion of irrelevant papers, six studies (eleven reports) were selected for inclusion. Individual participant data were available from the two largest studies for meta-analysis. Selection bias and attrition bias could not be excluded within the four smaller studies, but the two largest studies reported attrition rates and adequate methods of randomisation and allocation concealment. Only one small trial used a double-blind design and the other trials were unblinded; however, most of the recurrences were generalised tonic-clonic seizures, a type of seizure that is easily recognisable. Compared to controls, participants randomised to immediate treatment had a lower probability of relapse at one year (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.58; 6 studies, 1634 participants; high-certainty evidence), at five years (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89; 2 studies, 1212 participants; high-certainty evidence) and a higher probability of an immediate five-year remission (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.54; 2 studies, 1212 participants; high-certainty evidence). However, there was no difference between immediate treatment and control in terms of five-year remission at any time (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.21; 2 studies, 1212 participants; high-certainty evidence). Antiepileptic drugs did not affect overall mortality after a first seizure (RR 1.16; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.95; 2 studies, 1212 participants; high-certainty evidence). Compared to deferred treatment, treatment of the first seizure was associated with a significantly higher risk of adverse events (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.79; 2 studies, 1212 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We assessed the certainty of the evidence as moderate to low for the association of higher risk of adverse events when treatment of the first seizure was compared to no treatment or placebo, (RR 14.50, 95% CI 1.93 to 108.76; 1 study; 118 participants) and (RR 4.91, 95% CI 1.10 to 21.93; 1 study, 228 participants) respectively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of the first unprovoked seizure reduces the risk of a subsequent seizure but does not affect the proportion of patients in remission in the long term. Antiepileptic drugs are associated with adverse events, and there is no evidence that they reduce mortality. In light of this review, the decision to start antiepileptic drug treatment following a first unprovoked seizure should be individualised and based on patient preference, clinical, legal, and sociocultural factors.

The efficacy of gastrodin in combination with folate and vitamin B12 on patients with epilepsy after stroke and its effect on HMGB-1, IL-2 and IL-6 serum levels

This study evaluated the efficacy of gastrodin in combination with folate (FOL) and vitamin-B12 (V-B12) on patients with epilepsy after stroke (EAS) and its effect on high-mobility group protein B1 (HMGB-1), interleukin-1 (IL-1), and IL-6 serum levels. The clinical data of 92 EAS patients admitted for treatment between April, 2014 and March, 2016 were collected. These patients were randomly divided into control and observation groups (n=46 each) using computer software. Patients in the control group were administered only regular antiepileptic drugs, whereas observation group patients also received a combination of gastrodin, FOL and V-B12. After treatment, we compared efficacy, frequency of epileptic seizure, and Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) scores. Serum homocysteine (HCY), FOL and V-B12 levels were detected 3 months later. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used to detect changes in serum HMGB-1, IL-2 and IL-6 levels at one day before treatment and on the 7th, 21st, 30th and 90th days after treatment. Pearson's correlation coefficient was utilized to analyze the correlations of HMGB-1 with IL-2 and IL-6. The total treatment effectiveness rate was 95.65% in the observation group, which was significantly higher than the control group (73.91%, p<0.05). Epileptic seizure frequency and MoCA scores significantly improved in the observation group (p<0.05). Serum HCY levels were significantly lower, whereas FOL and V-B12 serum levels were significantly higher, at 3 months post-treatment start in the observation group relative to control group (p<0.05). After treatment, serum HMGB-1, IL-2 and IL-6 levels progressively decreased over time in both groups, but observation group levels were significantly lower than in control group (p<0.05). Pearson's correlation coefficient analysis showed that HMGB-1 levels were positively correlated with IL-2 and IL-6 levels. A combination of gastrodin, FOL and V-B12 for EAS can significantly improve inflammatory response symptoms, decrease HCY levels, and increase FOL and V-B12 levels in serum while effectively controlling epileptic seizures, thus exhibiting relatively better clinical efficacy. Therefore, this combination treatment is worthy of being promoted in clinical practice.

Immediate antiepileptic drug treatment, versus placebo, deferred, or no treatment for first unprovoked seizure

BACKGROUND

There is considerable disagreement about the risk of recurrence following a first unprovoked epileptic seizure. A decision about whether to start antiepileptic drug treatment following a first seizure should be informed by information on the size of any reduction in risk of future seizures, the impact on long-term seizure remission, and the risk of adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To review the probability of seizure recurrence, seizure remission, mortality, and adverse effects of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment given immediately after the first seizure compared to controls, in children and adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (accessed 13 October 2015), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library September 2015, issue 9, accessed 13 October 2015), PUBMED (accessed 22 April 2015), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 13 October 2015), EMBASE (accessed 22 April 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed 15 October 2015), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP, accessed 13 October 2015). There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that could be blinded or unblinded. People of any age with a first unprovoked seizure of any type. Included studies compared participants receiving immediate antiepileptic treatment versus those receiving deferred treatment, those assigned to placebo, and those untreated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies identified by the search strategy for inclusion in the review and extracted data. The quality of the evidence was classified in four categories according to the GRADE approach. Dichotomous outcomes were expressed as Risk Ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Time-to-event outcomes were expressed as Hazard Ratios (HR) with 95% CI. Only one trial used a double-blind design, and the two largest studies were unblinded. Most of the recurrences were generalized tonic-clonic seizures, a major type of seizures that is easily recognised, which should reduce the risk of outcome reporting bias.

MAIN RESULTS

After exclusion of uninformative papers, only six studies (nine reports) were selected for inclusion. For the two largest studies data were available for individual participant meta-analysis. Compared to controls, participants randomised to immediate treatment had a lower probability of relapse at one year (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.58, high quality evidence), at five years (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89; high quality evidence) and a higher probability of an immediate five-year remission (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.54, high quality evidence). However there was no difference between immediate treatment and control in terms of five year remission at any time (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.21, high quality evidence). Antiepileptic drugs did not affect overall mortality after a first seizure (RR 1.16; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.95, high quality evidence). Compared to deferred treatment (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.79, moderate quality evidence), treatment of the first seizure was associated with a significantly higher risk of adverse events. Moderate to low quality imprecise evidence was available for the association of treatment of the first seizure compared to no treatment or placebo (RR 14.50, 95% CI 1.93 to 108.76) and(RR 4.91, 95% CI 1.10 to 21.93) respectively)

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of the first unprovoked seizure reduces the risk of a subsequent seizure but does not affect the proportion of patients in remission in the long-term. Antiepileptic drugs are associated with adverse events, and there is no evidence that they reduce mortality. In light of this review, the decision to start antiepileptic drug treatment following a first unprovoked seizure should be individualized and based on patient preference, clinical, legal, and socio-cultural factors.

Etiological prevalence of epilepsy and epileptic seizures in hospitalized elderly in a Brazilian tertiary center - Salvador - Brazil

Epilepsy in the elderly has high incidence and prevalence and is often underecognized.

OBJECTIVE

To describe etiological prevalence of epilepsy and epileptic seizures in elderly inpatients.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed on elderly patients who had epilepsy or epileptic seizures during hospitalization, from January 2009 to December 2010. One hundred and twenty patients were enrolled. They were divided into two age subgroups (median 75 years) with the purpose to compare etiologies.

RESULTS

The most common etiology was ischemic stroke (36.7%), followed by neoplasias (13.3%), hemorrhagic stroke (11.7%), dementias (11.4%) and metabolic disturbances (5.5%). The analysis of etiological association showed that ischemic stroke was predominant in the younger subgroup (45% vs 30%), and dementias in the older one (18.9% vs 3.8%), but with no statistical significance (p = 0.23).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that epilepsy and epileptic seizures in the elderly inpatients have etiological association with stroke, neoplasias and dementias.

The blood-brain barrier-gatekeeper to neuronal homeostasis: clinical implications in the setting of stroke

The blood-brain barrier is part of the neurovascular unit and serves as a functional and anatomical barrier between the blood and the extracellular space. It controls the flow of solutes in and out of the brain thereby providing an optimal environment for neuronal functioning. Paracellular transport between endothelial cells is restricted by tight junctions and transendothelial transport is reduced and more selective compared to capillaries of other organs. Further, the blood-brain barrier is involved in controlling blood flow and it is the site for signaling damage of the nervous system to the peripheral immune system. As an important player in brain homeostasis, blood-brain barrier dysfunction has been implicated in the pathophysiology of many brain diseases including stroke, traumatic brain injury, brain tumors, epilepsy and neurodegenerative disorders. In this article - highlighting recent advances in basic science - we review the features of the blood-brain barrier and their significance for neuronal homeostasis to discuss clinical implications for neurological complications following cerebral ischemia.

Antiepileptic drugs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in 2010, Issue 1. Seizures after stroke are an important clinical problem, and they may be associated with poor outcome. The effects of antiepileptic drugs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the effects of antiepileptic drugs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Specialised Registers of the Cochrane Epilepsy Group (12 August 2013) and the Cochrane Stroke Group (12 August 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 7), and MEDLINE (OVID, 1946 to 12 August 2013). We also checked the reference lists of articles retrieved from these searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials in which participants were assigned to treatment or control group (placebo or no drug).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all the titles, abstracts, and keywords of publications identified by the searches to assess their eligibility, and both review authors assessed their suitability for inclusion according to prespecified selection criteria. We included only one study for data collection and analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We found only one trial that fulfilled the study inclusion criteria of comparison of the effects of an antiepileptic drug with placebo (or no drug) for the primary or secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. This was a prospective randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial comparing valproic acid with placebo for primary prevention of seizures in 72 adults (over 18 years of age) with spontaneous non-aneurysmal, non-traumatic intracerebral haemorrhage; no statistically significant difference in outcome (seizure occurrence at one year) was demonstrated between groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of antiepileptic drugs for the primary or secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. Further well-conducted research is needed for this important clinical problem.

Incidence and predictors of post-stroke epilepsy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Stroke is the leading cause of seizures and epilepsy in the elderly. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence of post-stroke epilepsy (PSE) based on the revised epilepsy definition of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) in a population-based study and to describe possible predictors.

METHODS

Data from the prospective population-based Erlangen Stroke Project (ESPro) were collected to describe the frequency of PSE. Patients were followed up 3, 12, and 24 months after stroke. Stroke was diagnosed according to the WHO and PSE according to the new ILAE criteria. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of PSE including age, sex, stroke type, stroke severity, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

From 1998 to 2006, 1815 patients with first-ever stroke were included (55.7% women; mean age 72.7 years, SD 13). Patients with known (n = 52) or unknown (n = 331) prior-to-stroke epilepsy or no available information on post-stroke seizures (n = 412) were excluded. From the remaining 1020 patients, 84 (8.2%) developed PSE within 2 years after stroke. Univariate analysis demonstrated stroke severity (P < 0.001) and hypertension (P < 0.05) as predictors for PSE. In multivariable analysis, stroke severity remained the only independent predictor (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the revised ILAE definition of epilepsy, the incidence of PSE was high in the ESPro. The only independent predictor for PSE was stroke severity.

Seizures and the neurosurgical intensive care unit

The cause of seizures in the neurosurgical intensive care unit (NICU) can be categorized as emanating from either a primary brain pathology or from physiologic derangements of critical care illness. Patients are typically treated with parenteral antiepileptic drugs. For early onset ICU seizures that are easily controlled, data support limited treatment. Late seizures have a more ominous risk for subsequent epilepsy and should be treated for extended periods of time or indefinitely. This review ends by examining the treatment algorithms for simple seizures and status epilepticus and the role newer antiepileptic use can play in the NICU.

Survey of prophylactic antiseizure drug use for non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage

OBJECTIVE

Prophylactic antiseizure drugs (PAD) are commonly prescribed for non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) despite limited evidence for this indication. We sought to determine the current prescribing patterns of the use of a PAD for ICH.

METHODS

A 36-item survey was distributed to physicians who manage ICH patients soliciting details of PAD prescription in their practice.

RESULTS

A total of 199 physicians responded to the survey, all of who manage 50 or more ICH patients per year. The respondents were neurologists (32%), neurosurgeons (11%), and intensivists (57%) in academia (69%) and private practice (31%). Prophylactic antiseizure drugs prescriptions used: never (33%), 1-33% (35%), 34-66% (14%), 67-99% (9%) of the time, or always (9%). Most respondents performed electroencephalographic and serum level monitoring in at least some patients. Levetiracetam was used most often (60%), followed by fosphenytoin (37%), for a usual duration of days (36%), weeks (47%), or months (17%). Prophylactic antiseizure drugs prescription varied by patient characteristics and physician specialty. Perception of physician community consensus regarding PAD use for ICH among respondents ranged from strongly (7%) or weakly (23%) against the practice, to a fairly equal division of opinion (41%), to weakly (27%) or strongly (4%) in favor of the practice.

CONCLUSIONS

We found variability of multiple aspects of the current prescribing patterns and opinions regarding the use of a PAD for ICH. This variability is likely secondary to insufficient data. Clinical equipoise exists for this issue, and controlled trials would be both justified and useful.

Does aspirin use make it harder to collect seizures during elective video-EEG telemetry?

Aspirin has shown promise as an anticonvulsant drug in animal models. Whether aspirin alters seizure frequency in humans remains unstudied. We retrospectively looked at adults with focal onset epilepsy who took aspirin daily while undergoing elective video-EEG monitoring and compared them with similar age- and sex-matched controls to see if seizure frequencies were different between those two populations. Significantly fewer seizures were seen on day two of monitoring for patients on aspirin therapies. Higher aspirin doses were correlated with fewer seizures collected during the monitoring stay. Further prospective study is needed to determine whether aspirin affects more robust seizure control.

Management of seizures following a stroke: what are the options?

Post-stroke seizures are a frequent cause of remote symptomatic epilepsy in adults, especially in older age. About 10% of stroke patients will suffer a seizure, depending on risk factors, such as the type, location and severity of the stroke. Previous stroke accounts for 30-40% of all cases of epilepsy in the elderly. Compared with that in younger patients, the appearance of seizures in old age is less specific and may take time before a diagnosis can be proven. The optimal timing and type of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment for patients with post-stroke seizures is still a controversial issue. Many population- and hospital-based studies have been performed, ending with generalized recommendations, but still the decision to initiate AED treatment after a first or second seizure should be individualized. Prospective studies in the literature showed that immediate treatment after a first unprovoked seizure does not improve the long-term remission rate. However, because of the physical and psychological influences of recurrent seizures, prophylactic treatment should be considered after a first unprovoked event in an elderly person at high risk of recurrence, taking into consideration the individuality of the patient and a discussion with the patient and his/her family about the risks and benefits of both options. The latest studies regarding post-stroke seizure treatment showed that 'new-generation' drugs, such as lamotrigine, gabapentin and levetiracetam, in low doses would be reasonable because of their high rate of long-term seizure-free periods, improved safety profile, and fewer interactions with other drugs, especially anticoagulant ones, compared with first-generation AEDs. On the other hand, first-generation drugs, such as phenytoin, carbamazepine and phenobarbital, have the potential to have a harmful impact on recovery, bone health, cognition and blood sodium levels and may interact with other treatments used by the elderly population. The drug chosen for use in the elderly population should possess a wide spectrum of activity and have few side effects. An assessment should be done to identify possible drug-drug interactions, the drug should be started at a low dose and titrated slowly to the lowest maintenance dose possible, and enhanced quality of life should be a focus of treatment. So, in the end, further research is needed to determine, more appropriately, the type of AED therapy, timing and duration of treatment.

Seven questions about stroke and epilepsy

Seizures and stroke are both common neurologic conditions, but when they occur in close temporal proximity they produce much more concern than either does alone. The stroke specialist (and the family) fear that convulsions will worsen the stroke because of acute hypertension and airway compromise, and the epileptologist is concerned that these acute seizures are the harbingers of later epilepsy. Other less commonly recognized but important aspects of this relationship are that subclinical seizures worsen some forms of stroke, and some anticonvulsants may have more adverse effects on stroke patients than they do in other groups. In surveying the connections between these two conditions, I have attempted to address seven questions. For some questions, there are data to help provide an answer; for others, there is only opinion; and for a maddening few, newer research is making older suggestions less certain.

Symptomatic and palliative care for stroke survivors

Stroke is the leading cause of disability and one of the most common causes of death worldwide. Outside the setting of acute management, secondary prevention and stroke rehabilitation, little has been written to address the ongoing symptomatic and palliative needs of these patients and their families. In this literature review, we look beyond secondary prevention with the aim of providing evidence-informed management guidelines for the myriad and often under-recognized symptomatic and palliative care needs of stroke survivors. Some of the most common and disabling post-stroke symptoms that are reviewed here include central post-stroke pain, hemiplegic shoulder pain, painful spasticity, fatigue, incontinence, post-stroke seizures, sexual dysfunction, sleep-disordered breathing, depression and emotionalism. We review the role of caregivers and explore ways to support them and, lastly, remind the reader to be perceptive to the patient's spiritual needs. The literature is most robust, including controlled trials, for central post-stroke pain and depression. Synthesis and discussion outside these areas are frequently limited to smaller studies, case reports and expert opinion. While some data exists to guide informed decision-making, there is an urgent need to document best practice and identify appropriate clinical standards for the full spectrum of symptoms experienced by stroke survivors. We present the current and established data to aid health care providers in symptomatic and palliative management of stroke survivors.

Review article: phenytoin use and efficacy in the ED

This article reviews the evidence regarding the use of phenytoin in adult and paediatric patients experiencing seizures in the ED in Australasia, including relevant pharmacokinetics, dosage, therapeutic drug monitoring and methods of administration. It summarizes current evidence regarding the use of phenytoin in a number of seizure types commonly seen in ED. A search of Medline, Embase and Cochrane was performed using appropriate keyword and MeSH headings. A loading dose of phenytoin should be given to phenytoin naïve patients for the emergency treatment of seizures; parenteral administration results in therapeutic concentration sooner than oral administration but is associated with more frequent and significant adverse effects. Diluting phenytoin is safe but there is limited evidence regarding adverse effects of diluted phenytoin; a filter is probably not needed. Free phenytoin concentrations correlate best with antiseizure efficacy. Phenytoin is used in the treatment of status epilepticus although evidence here is limited; it may also be given to prevent early post-traumatic seizures. It should not be given to treat or prevent eclamptic or alcohol-related seizures. There is insufficient evidence regarding its use in preventing febrile convulsions, treating or preventing seizures due to space occupying lesions or intracerebral haemorrhage and thrombosis. In conclusion, phenytoin is appropriate for treatment of some seizures seen in the ED; it is associated with significant adverse effects; trials are ongoing regarding the use of other anticonvulsants in the treatment of status epilepticus.

Anoxic-ischemic encephalopathy and strokes causing impaired consciousness

Coma due to global or focal ischemia or hemorrhage is reviewed. Impaired consciousness due to anoxic-ischemic encephalopathy after cardiac arrest is common but prognostically problematic. Recent guidelines need to be refined for those patients who have received therapeutic hypothermia. Strokes, both ischemic and hemorrhagic, can affect the level of consciousness by damaging specific brain structures involved in alertness because of widespread cerebral injury or secondary cerebral or systemic complications.

Seizure risk from cavernous or arteriovenous malformations: prospective population-based study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the risk of epileptic seizures due to a brain arteriovenous malformation (AVM) or cavernous malformation (CM).

METHODS

In a prospective population-based study of new diagnoses of AVMs (n = 229) or CMs (n = 139) in adults in Scotland in 1999-2003, we used annual medical records surveillance, general practitioner follow-up, and patient questionnaires to quantify the risk of seizures between clinical presentation and AVM/CM treatment, last follow-up, or death.

RESULTS

The 5-year risk of first-ever seizure after presentation was higher for AVMs presenting with intracranial hemorrhage or focal neurologic deficit (ICH/FND: n = 119; 23%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 9%-37%) than for incidental AVMs (n = 40; 8%, 95% CI 0%-20%), CMs presenting with ICH/FND (n = 38; 6%, 95% CI 0%-14%), or incidental CMs (n = 57; 4%, 95% CI 0%-10%). For adults who had never experienced ICH/FND, the 5-year risk of epilepsy after first-ever seizure was higher for CMs (n = 23; 94%, 95% CI 84%-100%) than AVMs (n = 37; 58%, 95% CI 40%-76%; p = 0.02). Among adults who never experienced ICH/FND and presented with or developed epilepsy, there was no difference in the proportions achieving 2-year seizure freedom over 5 years between AVMs (n = 43; 45%, 95% CI 20%-70%) and CMs (n = 35; 47%, 95% CI 27%-67%).

CONCLUSIONS

AVM-related ICH confers a significantly higher risk of a first-ever seizure compared to CMs or incidental AVMs. Adults with a CM have a high risk of epilepsy after a first-ever seizure but achieve seizure freedom as frequently as those with epilepsy due to an AVM.