Objective: We aimed to study the prevalence of visual memory dysfunction among epilepsy patients and identify the predictors that could contribute to the impairment.
Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study. We analyzed 250 patients with epilepsy from neurology clinic at our tertiary center. Assessment of visual memory was done using Wechsler Memory Scale-IV (WMS-IV) with scores from subsets of visual reproduction I, II and designs I, II contributing to visual memory index (VMI) score. The correlation between continuous variables was analyzed using Pearson correlation; whereas the VMI scores of different factors were analyzed via a 1-way ANOVA test. The statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
Results: The prevalence of visual memory dysfunction in our epilepsy population was 37.2%. Analysis of individual predictors showed that older patients, lower educational level, combined generalized and focal types of epilepsy, longer duration of epilepsy, greater number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) used, and abnormal neuroimaging contributed to poor visual memory. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that educational level, types of epilepsy, and the number of AEDs used were significant predictors for visual memory impairment.
Conclusion: Visual memory dysfunction in patients with epilepsy was due to manifold confounding factors. Our findings enabled us to identify patients with visual memory dysfunction and modifiable factors that contribute to it. WMS-IV is a suitable assessment tool to determine visual memory function, which can help clinicians to optimize the patients' treatment.
METHODS: The articles related to the topic were identified through Medline and PubMed search (1968-Feburary 2010) for English language on the interaction between parenteral nutrition and antiepileptic drugs; the search terms used were anti-epileptic drugs, parenteral nutrition, and/or interaction, and/or in vitro. The search looked for prospective randomized and nonrandomized controlled studies; prospective nonrandomized uncontrolled studies; retrospective studies; case reports; and in vitro studies. Full text of the articles were then traced from the Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) library subscribed databases, including Wiley-Blackwell Library, Cochrane Library, EBSCOHost, OVID, ScienceDirect, SAGE Premier, Scopus, SpringerLINK, and Wiley InterScience. The articles from journals not listed by USM library were traced through inter library loan.
RESULTS: There were interactions between parenteral nutrition and drugs, including antiepileptics. Several guidelines were designed for the management of illnesses such as traumatic brain injuries or cancer patients, involving the use of parenteral nutrition and antiepileptics. Moreover, many studies demonstrated the in vitro and in vivo parenteral nutrition -drugs interactions, especially with antiepileptics.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence supporting the existence of parenteral nutrition-antiepileptic drugs interaction. The issue has not been studied in formal researches, but several case reports and anecdotes demonstrate this drug-nutrition interaction. However, alteration in the drug-free fraction result from parenteral nutrition-drug (i.e. antiepileptics) interactions may necessitate scrupulous reassessment of drug dosages in patients receiving these therapies. This reassessment may be particularly imperative in certain clinical situations characterized by hypoalbuminemia (e.g., burn patients).
METHODS: Patients prescribed mood stabilizers (lithium, carbamazepine, valproic acid, or lamotrigine) for a psychiatric condition other than bipolar disorder (codes F31.0-F31.9 in the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition, Clinical Modification) were recruited through convenience sampling. A website-based data entry system was used for data collection.
RESULTS: In total, 1557 psychiatric patients were enrolled. Schizophrenia, schizotypal, delusional, and other non-mood psychotic disorders (F20-F29, 55.8 %) was the most common diagnosis, followed by non-bipolar mood disorders (F30, F31- F39, 25.3 %), organic mental disorder (F00-F09, 8.8 %), mental retardation (F70-F79, 5.8 %) and anxiety, dissociative, stress-related, somatoform and other nonpsychotic mental disorders (F40-F48, 4.4 %). The most frequently targeted symptoms (>20 %) were irritability (48 %), impulsivity (32.4 %), aggression (29.2 %), anger (20.8 %), and psychosis (24.1 %). Valproic acid was the most frequently used medication.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians typically prescribe mood stabilizers as empirically supported treatment to manage mood symptoms in patients with diagnoses other than bipolar disorders, though there is on official indication for these disorders. The costs and benefits of this add-on symptomatic treatment warrant further investigation.
METHODS: Articles were retrieved from EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library from inception to January 2016. Treatment outcomes were analysed based on responder, seizure-free, withdrawal and adverse event rates. Quality of each study was also assessed.
RESULTS: Twelve articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity and quality of the included studies were considered acceptable. Overall, newer AEDs as adjunct therapy in children with inadequate control of focal seizure showed a trend of better seizure outcomes. The pooled ORs for responder, seizure-free and withdrawal rates were 2.15 (95%CI:1.72, 2.69), 1.99 (95%CI:0.72, 5.48) and 0.69 (95%CI:1.13, 2.39) respectively. Adverse events of newer AEDs were comparatively higher than placebo (OR:1.64, 95%CI:1.13, 2.39).
CONCLUSION: In our updated review, newer AEDs as adjunct therapy for focal epilepsy in children have trends of better effectiveness compared to placebo. Newer AEDs are associated with statistically more children with >50% seizure reduction, and a trend of better seizure freedom. Their tolerability would also be considered acceptable with the observed low withdrawal rate. However, the relative lack of well-conducted RCTs evaluating their effectiveness against other active AED treatment in children would not facilitate evidence-based practice. This highlights the knowledge gap and the need for more well-conducted RCTs against active treatments to ascertain the long term effectiveness and the role of newer AEDs in managing epilepsy in children.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: To examine this hypothesis, in the present study, the associations between CYP3A5 variants (rs776746 and rs1419745) and response to carbamazepine and valproic acid monotherapy in Malaysian epileptic patients were evaluated.
RESULTS: A total of 288 Malaysian epileptic patients were recruited and further reviewed, of whom 63 patients were on carbamazepine monotherapy, and 85 patients were on valproic acid monotherapy. There was no patient with drug hypersensitivity syndrome within the population. Subjects were genotyped by using Sequenom MassARRAY platform. This study found a significant association of CYP3A5 rs776746 with the carbamazepine treatment response in total patients (p = 0.026) and Malay ethnic subgroup (p = 0.006). In addition, a marginal significant association of CYP3A5 rs1419745 with carbamazepine treatment response was reported in the Malays. Similarly, CYP3A5 rs776746 was associated with valproic acid response in total patients (p = 0.037) and Malays (marginal p = 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that CYP3A5 polymorphisms affect carbamazepine and valproic acid response in Malaysian epileptic patients.