6 research outputs found
Overground endoscopic findings and respiratory sound analysis in horses with recurrent laryngeal neuropathy after unilateral laser ventriculocordectomy
Background:
Unilateral ventriculocordectomy (VeC) is frequently performed, yet objective studies in horses with naturally occurring recurrent laryngeal neuropathy (RLN) are few.
Objectives:
To evaluate respiratory noise and exercising overground endoscopy in horses with grade B and C laryngeal function, before and after unilateral laser VeC.
Study design:
Prospective study in clinically affected clientâowned horses.
Methods:
Exercising endoscopy was performed and concurrent respiratory noise was recorded. A leftâsided laser VeC was performed under standing sedation. Owners were asked to present the horse for reâexamination 6â8 weeks postâoperatively when exercising endoscopy and sound recordings were repeated. Exercising endoscopic findings were recorded, including the degree of arytenoid stability. Quantitative measurement of leftâtoâright quotient angle ratio (LRQ) and rima glottidis area ratio (RGA) were performed preâ and postâoperatively. Sound analysis was performed, and measurements of the energy change in F1, F2 and F3 formants between preâ and postâoperative recordings were made and statistically analysed.
Results:
Three grade B and seven grade C horses were included; 6/7grade C horses preoperatively had bilateral vocal fold collapse (VFC) and 5/7 had mild rightâsided medial deviation of the aryâepiglottic fold (MDAF). Right VFC and MDAF was still present in these horses postâoperatively; grade B horses had no other endoscopic dynamic abnormalities postâoperatively. Sound analysis showed significant reduction in energy in formant F2 (P = 0.05) after surgery.
Main limitations:
The study sample size was small and multiple dynamic abnormalities made sound analysis challenging.
Conclusions:
RLNâaffected horses have reduction in sound levels in F2 after unilateral laser VeC. Continuing noise may be caused by other ongoing forms of dynamic obstruction in grade C horses. Unilateral VeC is useful for grade B horses based on endoscopic images. In grade C horses, bilateral VeC, right aryâepiglottic fold resection ± laryngoplasty might be a better option than unilateral VeC alone
The SANAD study of effectiveness of valproate, lamotrigine, or topiramate for generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial
BACKGROUND:
Valproate is widely accepted as a drug of first choice for patients with generalised onset seizures, and its broad spectrum of efficacy means it is recommended for patients with seizures that are difficult to classify. Lamotrigine and topiramate are also thought to possess broad spectrum activity. The SANAD study aimed to compare the longer-term effects of these drugs in patients with generalised onset seizures or seizures that are difficult to classify.
METHODS:
SANAD was an unblinded randomised controlled trial in hospital-based outpatient clinics in the UK. Arm B of the study recruited 716 patients for whom valproate was considered to be standard treatment. Patients were randomly assigned to valproate, lamotrigine, or topiramate between Jan 12, 1999, and Aug 31, 2004, and follow-up data were obtained up to Jan 13, 2006. Primary outcomes were time to treatment failure, and time to 1-year remission, and analysis was by both intention to treat and per protocol. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN38354748.
FINDINGS:
For time to treatment failure, valproate was significantly better than topiramate (hazard ratio 1.57 [95% CI 1.19-2.08]), but there was no significant difference between valproate and lamotrigine (1.25 [0.94-1.68]). For patients with an idiopathic generalised epilepsy, valproate was significantly better than both lamotrigine (1.55 [1.07-2.24] and topiramate (1.89 [1.32-2.70]). For time to 12-month remission valproate was significantly better than lamotrigine overall (0.76 [0.62-0.94]), and for the subgroup with an idiopathic generalised epilepsy 0.68 (0.53-0.89). But there was no significant difference between valproate and topiramate in either the analysis overall or for the subgroup with an idiopathic generalised epilepsy.
INTERPRETATION:
Valproate is better tolerated than topiramate and more efficacious than lamotrigine, and should remain the drug of first choice for many patients with generalised and unclassified epilepsies. However, because of known potential adverse effects of valproate during pregnancy, the benefits for seizure control in women of childbearing years should be considered
The SANAD study of effectiveness of carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate for treatment of partial epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial
BACKGROUND: Carbamazepine is widely accepted as a drug of first choice for patients with partial onset seizures. Several newer drugs possess efficacy against these seizure types but previous randomised controlled trials have failed to inform a choice between these drugs. We aimed to assess efficacy with regards to longer-term outcomes, quality of life, and health economic outcomes. METHODS: SANAD was an unblinded randomised controlled trial in hospital-based outpatient clinics in the UK. Arm A recruited 1721 patients for whom carbamazepine was deemed to be standard treatment, and they were randomly assigned to receive carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate. Primary outcomes were time to treatment failure, and time to 12-months remission, and assessment was by both intention to treat and per protocol. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN38354748. FINDINGS: For time to treatment failure, lamotrigine was significantly better than carbamazepine (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78 [95% CI 0·63â0·97]), gabapentin (0·65 [0·52â0·80]), and topiramate (0·64 [0·52â0·79]), and had a non-significant advantage compared with oxcarbazepine (1·15 [0·86â1·54]). For time to 12-month remission carbamazepine was significantly better than gabapentin (0·75 [0·63â0·90]), and estimates suggest a non-significant advantage for carbamazepine against lamotrigine (0·91 [0·77â1·09]), topiramate (0·86 [0·72â1·03]), and oxcarbazepine (0·92 [0·73â1·18]). In a per-protocol analysis, at 2 and 4 years the difference (95% CI) in the proportion achieving a 12-month remission (lamotrigine-carbamazepine) is 0 (â8 to 7) and 5 (â3 to 12), suggesting non-inferiority of lamotrigine compared with carbamazepine. INTERPRETATION: Lamotrigine is clinically better than carbamazepine, the standard drug treatment, for time to treatment failure outcomes and is therefore a cost-effective alternative for patients diagnosed with partial onset seizures
The SANAD study of effectiveness of carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate for treatment of partial epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial
BACKGROUND:
Carbamazepine is widely accepted as a drug of first choice for patients with partial onset seizures. Several newer drugs possess efficacy against these seizure types but previous randomised controlled trials have failed to inform a choice between these drugs. We aimed to assess efficacy with regards to longer-term outcomes, quality of life, and health economic outcomes.
METHODS:
SANAD was an unblinded randomised controlled trial in hospital-based outpatient clinics in the UK. Arm A recruited 1721 patients for whom carbamazepine was deemed to be standard treatment, and they were randomly assigned to receive carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate. Primary outcomes were time to treatment failure, and time to 12-months remission, and assessment was by both intention to treat and per protocol. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN38354748.
FINDINGS:
For time to treatment failure, lamotrigine was significantly better than carbamazepine (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78 [95% CI 0.63-0.97]), gabapentin (0.65 [0.52-0.80]), and topiramate (0.64 [0.52-0.79]), and had a non-significant advantage compared with oxcarbazepine (1.15 [0.86-1.54]). For time to 12-month remission carbamazepine was significantly better than gabapentin (0.75 [0.63-0.90]), and estimates suggest a non-significant advantage for carbamazepine against lamotrigine (0.91 [0.77-1.09]), topiramate (0.86 [0.72-1.03]), and oxcarbazepine (0.92 [0.73-1.18]). In a per-protocol analysis, at 2 and 4 years the difference (95% CI) in the proportion achieving a 12-month remission (lamotrigine-carbamazepine) is 0 (-8 to 7) and 5 (-3 to 12), suggesting non-inferiority of lamotrigine compared with carbamazepine.
INTERPRETATION:
Lamotrigine is clinically better than carbamazepine, the standard drug treatment, for time to treatment failure outcomes and is therefore a cost-effective alternative for patients diagnosed with partial onset seizures
The SANAD study of effectiveness of valproate, lamotrigine, or topiramate for generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial
BACKGROUND:
Valproate is widely accepted as a drug of first choice for patients with generalised onset seizures, and its broad spectrum of efficacy means it is recommended for patients with seizures that are difficult to classify. Lamotrigine and topiramate are also thought to possess broad spectrum activity. The SANAD study aimed to compare the longer-term effects of these drugs in patients with generalised onset seizures or seizures that are difficult to classify.
METHODS:
SANAD was an unblinded randomised controlled trial in hospital-based outpatient clinics in the UK. Arm B of the study recruited 716 patients for whom valproate was considered to be standard treatment. Patients were randomly assigned to valproate, lamotrigine, or topiramate between Jan 12, 1999, and Aug 31, 2004, and follow-up data were obtained up to Jan 13, 2006. Primary outcomes were time to treatment failure, and time to 1-year remission, and analysis was by both intention to treat and per protocol. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN38354748.
FINDINGS:
For time to treatment failure, valproate was significantly better than topiramate (hazard ratio 1.57 [95% CI 1.19-2.08]), but there was no significant difference between valproate and lamotrigine (1.25 [0.94-1.68]). For patients with an idiopathic generalised epilepsy, valproate was significantly better than both lamotrigine (1.55 [1.07-2.24] and topiramate (1.89 [1.32-2.70]). For time to 12-month remission valproate was significantly better than lamotrigine overall (0.76 [0.62-0.94]), and for the subgroup with an idiopathic generalised epilepsy 0.68 (0.53-0.89). But there was no significant difference between valproate and topiramate in either the analysis overall or for the subgroup with an idiopathic generalised epilepsy.
INTERPRETATION:
Valproate is better tolerated than topiramate and more efficacious than lamotrigine, and should remain the drug of first choice for many patients with generalised and unclassified epilepsies. However, because of known potential adverse effects of valproate during pregnancy, the benefits for seizure control in women of childbearing years should be considered