Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42087030›Full record

ArticleNeurocritical care2026

Prophylactic Antiepileptic Drugs in Nontraumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Natan Lucca Lima, Marcos Henrique da Silva Mezzari, Josete Mazon, Gustavo Rassier Isolan

Abstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurocritical care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Natan Lucca LimaFaculty of Medicine, Federal University of Santa Catarina, R. Gov. Jorge Lacerda, Araranguá, Santa Catarina, 3201, Brazil. natan.lucca.lima@grad.ufsc.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-7595-7082
Marcos Henrique da Silva MezzariFaculty of Medicine, Federal University of Santa Catarina, R. Gov. Jorge Lacerda, Araranguá, Santa Catarina, 3201, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-0131-2682
Josete MazonDepartment of Medical Sciences, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Araranguá , Santa Catarina, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5800-1351
Gustavo Rassier IsolanDepartment of Neurosurgery, The Center for Advanced Neurology and Neurosurgery (CEANNE), Porto Alegre, Rio Grande Do Sul, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7863-0112

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe utility of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for seizure prophylaxis following nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) remains uncertain, with guidelines based on low-quality evidence that often pools heterogeneous medications. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the utility of AEDs and to compare the efficacy and safety of individual agents in this setting.

methodsA comprehensive systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to 22 October 2025 was conducted. We included studies involving adults with nontraumatic ICH that compared individual prophylactic AEDs against each other or a control group. We employed a Bayesian random-effects NMA to synthesize the data. Primary outcomes were early seizure incidence and unfavorable functional outcome. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, serious adverse events, NIHSS score at last follow-up, and mortality. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) and Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions, Version 2 (ROBINS-I V2) tools, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

resultsOut of 2142 identified citations, 17 studies (4 RCTs, 13 observational; N = 6597 patients) met the inclusion criteria. No AED significantly reduced early seizures or improved functional outcomes compared with placebo. However, ranking probabilities (surface under the cumulative ranking curve, SUCRA) suggested valproate was most likely to prevent early seizures (SUCRA = 0.8330) and improve functional outcomes (SUCRA = 0.7938). Valproate also ranked highest for overall safety (SUCRA = 0.8085) and NIHSS improvement (SUCRA = 0.8187), while levetiracetam ranked best for serious adverse events (SUCRA = 0.7935). Eslicarbazepine was associated with increased mortality, whereas valproate showed the most favorable ranking for this outcome (SUCRA = 0.7705). The certainty of evidence across comparisons ranged from low to very low.

conclusionsThis NMA found no robust evidence to support the routine prophylactic use of AEDs after nontraumatic ICH. Nonetheless, valproate consistently demonstrated the best efficacy and relative safety profiles. This finding warrants investigation in future RCTs, particularly in subgroups of patients at high risk for post-ICH seizures.

Indexed as

AnticonvulsantsCerebral HemorrhageSeizuresHumansAnticonvulsantsAntiepileptic drugsIntracerebral hemorrhageNetwork meta-analysisSeizure

Identifiers

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.