الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 163 |  |  |
| | | from | 163 | | |
Abstract
E
pilepsy has usually been defined as ≥2 unprovoked seizures separated by at least 24hours. This definition is based on the concept that the recurrence risk after two unprovoked seizures is about 80%, while the recurrence risk after a single unprovoked seizure is only about 50%.
This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of carbamazepine as monotherapy and as adjunctive therapy in treatment of children with focal and generalized epilepsies respectively, and how it compares to other drugs.
It was an observational retrospective study. held from December 2021 to June 2022 of 6 months’ time frame.
The study was conducted on total number of 200 pediatric patients who were 16 years old or less
All the included patients were subjected to; careful history taking including: patients’ history, Detailed history of epilepsy, Drug therapy history, Comparison regarding efficacy and tolerability and Complementary clinical data.
Records of 100 patients who received carbamazepine treatment or derivative (group A) and 100 pediatric patients with epilepsy who did not receive carbamazepine treatment or derivative (group B) (total equal to 200 patients). Both Groups A and B were further subdivided into 3 subgroups:
(1) patients with focal epilepsy on monotherapy (A1) with 9 patients & (B1) with 11 patients .
(2) patients with focal epilepsy on polytherapy (A2) with 27 patients & (B2) with 9 patients .
(3) patients with generalized epilepsy on polytherapy (A3) with 64 patients & (B3) with 80 patients .
Efficacy Assessment done through:
Subjective/Clinical: Control of seizures – partial or complete.
Objective: GASE score before and after treatment.
EEG: before and after treatment (if available).
¬Tolerability Assessment done through:
Presence and type of adverse events
Need for drug discontinuation due to adverse events
Results:
Comparison between both groups with focal monotherapy (the one that received CBZ or derivative VS the other with any other AED) showed statistically significant result regarding final GASE severity score difference (by subtracting GASE severity score after ttt from this before ttt) with much improvement in patients who received CBZ or derivatives.
Comparison between both groups with focal convulsions and were on polytherapy regimen (one group with combination including CBZ or derivative and the other with any other combination of AED) showed statistically significant results regarding seizure frequency difference (by subtracting seizure frequency after ttt from this before ttt) with better improvement in the group that received other AED.
Comparison between both groups with generalized seizures and on polytherapy (one with combination containing CBZ or derivative and the other with combination with any other AED showed statistically significant results regarding seizure frequency difference (by subtracting seizure frequency after ttt from this before ttt) with better results in the group that received other AED.
Regarding tolerability the drug was well tolerated in all groups.
CONCLUSION
Carbamazepine and its derivatives had superior efficacy as monotherapy for treating focal convulsions than other AEDs; on the other hand it had inferior efficacy as polytherapy in treating children with generalized convulsions.
However judging carbamazepine or derivatives as polytherapy in treating children with focal convulsions compared with other AEDs was not accurate since doses administrated & quality of patients were not the same in both groups.
Regarding tolerability of carbamazepine and derivatives compared to other AED and it was well tolerated in all groups.