ArticleBrain & spine2026
Influence of epilepsy and antiepileptic drug intake in patients suffering from aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage on outcome.
Article in Brain & spine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Many patients suffering from aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) develop epileptic seizures. The recent guidelines do not recommend routine administration of antiepileptic drugs (AED). Research question: We performed a retrospective single-center study to analyze the effect of AEDs on the outcome in patients suffering from epilepsy after SAH. Methods: 752 patients with SAH treated between 01/2006 and 12/2020 were analyzed. Patients were divided into good-grade (WFNS grades I-II) versus poor-grade (WFNS grades III-V) on admission. Data of patients' history as well as clinical course were collected. Outcome according to the modified Rankin scale (mRS) score was assessed at 6 months after ictus. Outcome was dichotomized into favorable (mRS 0-2) and unfavorable (mRS 3-6). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: 346 (46.0 %) patients suffered from poor-grade SAH and 366 (48.7 %) patients achieved unfavorable outcome. 202 (26.9 %) patients suffered from seizures after SAH and 136 (18.1 %) had to be treated with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for more than a week. Epilepsy and AED intake after 3 months was more often in patients with unfavorable outcome (18.9 % vs. 8.3 %; p < 0.001 and 21.9 % vs. 11.9 %; p < 0.001, respectively).In multivariate analysis, 'poor-grade SAH' (p < 0.001, OR 10.5, 95 % CI 6.0-18.2), 'age >50 years' (p = 0.001, OR 2.7, 95 % CI 1.5-4.8, 'aneurysm size >10 mm' (p = 0.018, OR 2.2, 95 % CI 1.1-4.1), 'hydrocephalus' (p = 0.002, OR 2.6, 95 % CI 1.4-4.7), 'delayed cerebral ischemia' (p = 0.002, OR 5.0, 95 % CI 2.3-10.9) and 'epilepsy within 3 months' (p = 0.002, OR 5.9, 95 % CI 1.9-18.3) were predictors for unfavorable outcome, whereas 'AED intake after 6 months' (p = 0.037, OR 0.35, 95 % CI 0.13-0.94) was predictor for favorable outcome. Conclusions: Manifestation of epilepsy in patients suffering from SAH deteriorates outcome. Continued AED intake in SAH patients who developed epileptic seizures should be advised.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.