F J E Vajda1, T J O'Brien2, J Graham2, C M Lander3, M J Eadie3. 1. Department of Medicine and Neurosciences, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3050, Australia. Electronic address: vajda@netspace.net.au. 2. Department of Medicine and Neurosciences, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3050, Australia. 3. Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital and School of Medicine and Biomedical Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4027, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the outcomes in regards to seizure control and foetal malformation in pregnant women with epilepsy not treated with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). METHOD: Analysis of data from the Australian Register of AEDs in Pregnancy on 148 women with epilepsy who were not receiving AEDs before and during at least the first trimester of pregnancy. RESULTS: Seizure control was less likely to be maintained in AED-untreated pregnancies. Whether AED therapy had been ceased in preparation for pregnancy, or had not been employed for long periods before pregnancy, made no statistically significant difference to seizure control outcomes, but those who ceased therapy in preparation for pregnancy were more likely to again be taking AED therapy by term. Foetal malformation rates were reasonably similar in untreated pregnancies, and in treated pregnancies if pregnancies exposed to known AED teratogens (valproate and probably topiramate) were excluded from consideration. CONCLUSION: Leaving epilepsy untreated during pregnancy appears disadvantageous from the standpoint of seizure control: it also does not reduce the hazard of foetal malformation unless it avoids valproate or topiramate intake during pregnancy.
PURPOSE: To determine the outcomes in regards to seizure control and foetal malformation in pregnant women with epilepsy not treated with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). METHOD: Analysis of data from the Australian Register of AEDs in Pregnancy on 148 women with epilepsy who were not receiving AEDs before and during at least the first trimester of pregnancy. RESULTS:Seizure control was less likely to be maintained in AED-untreated pregnancies. Whether AED therapy had been ceased in preparation for pregnancy, or had not been employed for long periods before pregnancy, made no statistically significant difference to seizure control outcomes, but those who ceased therapy in preparation for pregnancy were more likely to again be taking AED therapy by term. Foetal malformation rates were reasonably similar in untreated pregnancies, and in treated pregnancies if pregnancies exposed to known AED teratogens (valproate and probably topiramate) were excluded from consideration. CONCLUSION: Leaving epilepsy untreated during pregnancy appears disadvantageous from the standpoint of seizure control: it also does not reduce the hazard of foetal malformation unless it avoids valproate or topiramate intake during pregnancy.
Authors: Michael Paulzen; Julia C Stingl; Marc Augustin; Helena Saßmannshausen; Cordula Franz; Gerhard Gründer; Georgios Schoretsanitis Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: Sonia Roldan Munoz; Angela Lupattelli; Sieta T de Vries; Peter G M Mol; Hedvig Nordeng Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-02-05 Impact factor: 2.692