More harm than good
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: The purposes of this study were to examine the current Brain Trauma Foundation recommendation for antiseizure prophylaxis with phenytoin during the first 7 days after traumatic brain injury (TBI) in preventing seizures and to determine if this medication affects functional recovery at discharge. METHODS: The records of adult (age ≥ 18 years) patients with blunt severe TBI who remained in the hospital at least 7 days after injury were retrospectively reviewed from January 2008 to January 2010. Clinical seizure rates during the first 7 days after injury and functional outcome at discharge were compared for the two groups based on antiseizure prophylaxis, no prophylaxis (NP) versus phenytoin prophylaxis (PP). Statistical analysis was performed using χ2. RESULTS: A total of 93 adult patients who met the previously mentioned criteria were identified (43 [46%] NP group vs. 50 [54%] PP group). The two groups were well matched. Contrary to expectation, more seizures occurred in the PP group as compared with the NP group; however, this did not reach significance (PP vs. NP, 2 [4%] vs. 1 [2.3%], p = 1). There was no significant difference in the two groups (PP vs. NP) as far as disposition are concerned, mortality caused by head injury (4 [8%] vs. 3 [7%], p = 1), discharge home (16 [32%] vs. 17 [40%], p = 0.7), and discharge to rehabilitation (30 [60%] vs. 23 [53%], p = 0.9). However, with PP, there was a significantly longer hospital stay (PP vs. NP, 36 vs. 25 days, p = 0.04) and significantly worse functional outcome at discharge based on Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score (PP vs. NP, 2.9 vs. 3.4, p < 0.01) and modified Rankin Scale score (2.3 ± 1.7 vs. 3.1 ± 1.5, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: PP may not decrease early posttraumatic seizure and may suppress functional outcome after blunt TBI. These results need to be verified with randomized studies before recommending changes in clinical practice and do not apply to penetrating trauma. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV; epidemiologic study, level III.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- More harm than good
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2014
- Éditeur
- Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
University of Florida and Division of Pediatrics (J.J.T.) pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
University of Florida Health Science Center pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Florida College pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Submitted: August 15 pays non établi dans la noticeInstitution
-
This study was presented at the 72nd annual meeting of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisation à but non lucratif
-
email: [email protected] pays non établi dans la noticeInstitution
-
✠Deceased pays non établi dans la noticeInstitution
and Division of Pediatrics (J.J.T.) — University of Florida, University of Florida Health Science Center et Florida College, avec 4 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.