• Matthew B Jensen, Ahsan Sattar, and Khalid Al Sherbini.
• University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
• Neurol. Res. 2013 Nov 1; 35 (9): 984-7.

ObjectiveProphylactic antiseizure drugs (PAD) are commonly prescribed for non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) despite limited evidence for this indication. We sought to determine the current prescribing patterns of the use of a PAD for ICH.MethodsA 36-item survey was distributed to physicians who manage ICH patients soliciting details of PAD prescription in their practice.ResultsA total of 199 physicians responded to the survey, all of who manage 50 or more ICH patients per year. The respondents were neurologists (32%), neurosurgeons (11%), and intensivists (57%) in academia (69%) and private practice (31%). Prophylactic antiseizure drugs prescriptions used: never (33%), 1-33% (35%), 34-66% (14%), 67-99% (9%) of the time, or always (9%). Most respondents performed electroencephalographic and serum level monitoring in at least some patients. Levetiracetam was used most often (60%), followed by fosphenytoin (37%), for a usual duration of days (36%), weeks (47%), or months (17%). Prophylactic antiseizure drugs prescription varied by patient characteristics and physician specialty. Perception of physician community consensus regarding PAD use for ICH among respondents ranged from strongly (7%) or weakly (23%) against the practice, to a fairly equal division of opinion (41%), to weakly (27%) or strongly (4%) in favor of the practice.ConclusionsWe found variability of multiple aspects of the current prescribing patterns and opinions regarding the use of a PAD for ICH. This variability is likely secondary to insufficient data. Clinical equipoise exists for this issue, and controlled trials would be both justified and useful.

28 keywords...

hide…