DOI 10.1007/s12098-023-04527-7
Modified Atkins Diet vs. Ketogenic Diet in the Management of Children with Epileptic Spasms Refractory to First Line Treatment: An Open Labelled, Randomized Controlled Trial.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy and tolerability of modified Atkins diet (mAD) and ketogenic diet (KD) among children aged 9 mo to 3 y with epileptic spasms refractory to the first line treatment.
METHODS
An open labelled, randomized controlled trial with parallel group assignment was conducted among children aged 9 mo to 3 y with epileptic spasms refractory to the first line treatment. They were randomized to either receive the mAD along with conventional anti-seizure medications (n = 20) or KD with conventional anti-seizure medications (n = 20). Primary outcome measure was proportion of children who achieved "spasm freedom" at 4 wk and 12 wk. Secondary outcome measures were proportion of children who achieved >50% and >90% reduction in spasms at 4 wk and 12 wk, nature and proportion of the adverse effects as per parental reports.
RESULTS
Proportion of children achieving spasm freedom [mAD {4 (20%)} vs. KD {3 (15%)}: OR (95% CI) 1.42 (0.27-7.34); P = 0.67], >50% spasm reduction [mAD {3 (15%)} vs. KD {5 (25%)}: OR (95% CI) 0.53 (0.11-2.59); P = 0.63] and >90% spasm reduction [mAD {4 (20%)} vs. KD {2 (10%)}: OR (95% CI) 2.25 (0.36-13.97); P = 0.41] was comparable between the two groups at 12 wk. The diet was well tolerated in both the groups with vomiting and constipation being the most common reported adverse effect.
CONCLUSIONS
mAD is an effective alternative to KD in the management of children with epileptic spasms refractory to first line treatment. However, further studies with adequately powered sample size and longer follow-up are required.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI/2020/03/023791.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.