Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27582897›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in neurological disorders2016

Poststroke epilepsy: update and future directions.

Johan Zelano

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Seizures and epilepsy in patients with ischaemic stroke.Neurological research and practice · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Johan ZelanoDepartment of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, SE41345 Gothenburg, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stroke is among the most common causes of epilepsy after middle age. Patients with poststroke epilepsy (PSE) differ in several respects from patients with other forms of structural-metabolic epilepsy; not least in age, age-related sensitivity to side effects of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), and specific drug-drug interaction issues related to secondary-stroke prophylaxis. Encouragingly, there has lately been remarkable activity in the study of PSE. Three developments in PSE research deserve particular focus. First, large prospective trials have established the incidence and risk factors of PSE in the setting of modern stroke care. Stroke severity, cortical location, young age, and haemorrhage remain the most important risk factors. Second, although more studies are needed, epidemiological data indicate that the risk of PSE may be influenced, for instance, by statin treatment. Third, studies are emerging regarding the treatment and prognosis of PSE. Levetiracetam and lamotrigine may be well tolerated treatment options and seizure freedom is achieved in at least a similar proportion of patients as in other epilepsies. Furthermore, new animal models such as photothrombotic stroke gives hope of a more clear understanding of PSE epileptogenesis in the near future. In summary, PSE shows indications of maturing into an independent epilepsy research field. This review summarizes recent advances in our understanding of PSE and provides an update on management issues such as diagnosis, AED selection, and prognosis. Finally, future research challenges in the field are outlined.

Indexed as

antiepileptic drugsseizuresstroke

Identifiers

PMID27582897
PMCPMC4994782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.