Hongju Liu1, Xiaoli Xu1. 1. a Department of Neurosurgery , China-Japan Friendship Hospital , Beijing, China.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Adjunctive lacosamide treatment might be promising to treat seizures. However, the results remained controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of adjunctive lacosamide versus placebo in patients with seizures. METHODS: PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of adjunctive lacosamide versus placebo on seizures were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcomes were 50% responder rate and seizure freedom. RESULTS: Four RCTs involving 1199 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with placebo treatment, adjunctive lacosamide treatment was associated with a significantly increased 50% responder rate (RR = 1.89; 95% CI = 1.51-2.36; P < 0.00001) and seizure freedom (RR = 4.97; 95% CI = 1.78-13.91; P = 0.002), but improved dizziness (RR = 3.97; 95% CI = 2.91-5.42; P < 0.00001), nausea (RR = 2.85; 95% CI = 1.75-4.66; P < 0.0001), vomiting (RR = 4.11; 95% CI = 2.23-7.57; P < 0.00001), diplopia (RR = 6.85; 95% CI = 3.36-13.94; P < 0.00001), treatment-emergent adverse events (RR = 2.29; 95% CI = 1.93-2.71; P < 0.00001) and serious adverse events (RR = 2.52; 95% CI = 1.33-4.78; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to placebo, adjunctive lacosamide resulted in a significantly improved 50% responder rate and seizure freedom, but with increased dizziness, nausea, vomiting, diplopia, treatment-emergent adverse events and serious adverse events.
INTRODUCTION: Adjunctive lacosamide treatment might be promising to treat seizures. However, the results remained controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of adjunctive lacosamide versus placebo in patients with seizures. METHODS: PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of adjunctive lacosamide versus placebo on seizures were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcomes were 50% responder rate and seizure freedom. RESULTS: Four RCTs involving 1199 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with placebo treatment, adjunctive lacosamide treatment was associated with a significantly increased 50% responder rate (RR = 1.89; 95% CI = 1.51-2.36; P < 0.00001) and seizure freedom (RR = 4.97; 95% CI = 1.78-13.91; P = 0.002), but improved dizziness (RR = 3.97; 95% CI = 2.91-5.42; P < 0.00001), nausea (RR = 2.85; 95% CI = 1.75-4.66; P < 0.0001), vomiting (RR = 4.11; 95% CI = 2.23-7.57; P < 0.00001), diplopia (RR = 6.85; 95% CI = 3.36-13.94; P < 0.00001), treatment-emergent adverse events (RR = 2.29; 95% CI = 1.93-2.71; P < 0.00001) and serious adverse events (RR = 2.52; 95% CI = 1.33-4.78; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to placebo, adjunctive lacosamide resulted in a significantly improved 50% responder rate and seizure freedom, but with increased dizziness, nausea, vomiting, diplopia, treatment-emergent adverse events and serious adverse events.