Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Monday, February 6, 2023

Prophylactic antiseizure drugs for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Well shit, we've known for years that seizures can occur post stroke. We need research that creates protocols that will prevent those seizures. This doesn't do that. So why the fuck was this research approved? I'd fire the mentors and senior researchers involved. Nothing here gave me any new information.

Prophylactic antiseizure drugs for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

João Paulo Mota Telles https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9322-0405 joao.telles@fm.usp.br, Rebeka Bustamante Rocha, and Eberval Gadelha FigueiredoView all authors and affiliations
OnlineFirst
https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930221140071

Abstract

Background:

There is concern that recommendations on prophylactic antiseizure drugs (PASDs) for patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) are biased by studies using older drugs and no electrographic monitoring.

Aims:

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether PASDs in patients with sICH reduced seizure occurrence and improved functional outcomes. We included analyses of newer trials, newer antiseizure drugs, and effectiveness in patients with consistent electrographic monitoring.

Methods:

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane were searched from inception until 12 August 2022, to identify studies with patients with sICH treated with PASDs, regardless of study design. The studied outcomes were functional status and occurrence of seizures.

Results:

Fourteen studies were included, including 6742 patients. Risk of bias was low overall. There was no effect of PASD on seizure occurrence overall (odds ratio (OR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47–1.15), but they were associated with reduced occurrence in studies with electrographic monitoring (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18–0.70). There was no effect of PASDs on functional outcomes (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.91–1.47) or mortality (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65–1.11).

Conclusion:

Prophylactic antiseizure medications after sICH reduce seizures in studies with electroencephalogram monitoring in high-risk patients. However, this benefit did not reflect in the improvement of functional outcomes, even in studies with newer, less toxic, antiseizure drugs.
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)