4.3 Article

Surgical resection of subependymal giant cell astrocytomas (SEGAs) and changes in SEGA-related conditions: a US national claims database study

期刊

CURRENT MEDICAL RESEARCH AND OPINION
卷 28, 期 4, 页码 651-656

出版社

INFORMA HEALTHCARE
DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2012.658908

关键词

Bootstrapping method; Clinical effectiveness; Repeated measures analysis; SEGA-related conditions; Subependymal giant cell astrocytoma; Surgical resection

资金

  1. Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation
  2. Novartis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: To compare the prevalence rates of clinical conditions related to subependymal giant cell astrocytomas (SEGAs) before and after SEGA surgery among patients with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC). Methods: Based on three US national claims databases, we analyzed and compared the prevalence rates of 21 SEGA-related conditions (including seizures, hydrocephalus, headaches and stroke or hemiparesis) in the six months preceding surgery with the rates in the second through sixth post-surgery months and in the seventh through twelfth post-surgery months among TSC patients who underwent SEGA surgery during 2000-2009. Repeated measures analysis with a bootstrapping method was used to assess the surgery impact. Results: Patients (N=47) had a mean age of 11.5 years at their first SEGA surgery, and 66% were male. Compared with the six months preceding surgery, the post-surgery prevalence rates increased by 23-26% for seizures, 21-26% for hydrocephalus, 17-19% for headache and 6-9% for stroke or hemiparesis (all p<0.05). Repeated measures analysis confirmed the impact of surgery on the prevalence rate of these five conditions (all p<0.05). Conclusions: SEGA surgery has its important role in SEGA treatment. However, after SEGA surgery this group of TSC patients had increased prevalence rates of seizures, hydrocephalus, vision disorders, headaches, stroke or hemiparesis, and autism. Future research to examine the causes of these symptoms is imperative.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据