Cited by 113Epilepsy research and treatmentTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesTraumatic Brain Injury Research

Risk factors for posttraumatic epilepsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Xu, Tao, Yu, Xinyuan, Ou, Shu, Liu, Xi, Yuan, Jinxian, Huang, Hao, Yang, Juan, He, Liang +1 more·2017·Epilepsy & Behavior

Abstract

Objective A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to identify risk factors for posttraumatic epilepsy (PTE). Methods Two electronic databases (Medline and Embase) were searched to identify studies with a cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional design reporting on epidemiologic evidence regarding risk factors for PTE. Results Men had a higher risk of developing PTE than women [relative ratio (RR), 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.10-1.59]. A history of alcohol abuse (RR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.26-3.79), posttraumatic amnesia (RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.12-1.53), focal neurologic signs (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.16-1.74), and loss of consciousness at initial traumatic brain injury (TBI) (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.13-2.32) were associated with a greater risk of PTE. TBI-related abnormal neuroimaging findings, including skull fracture (RR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.49-3.44), midline shift (RR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.14-1.87), brain contusion (RR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.69-3.28), subdural hemorrhage (RR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.33-3.01), and intracranial hemorrhage (RR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.83-3.82) were strong risk factors for PTE. The risk of developing PTE after skull fracture, mild brain injury, and severe brain injury peaked within the first year after TBI, and then gradually decreased. However, a high risk of PTE was sustained for >10years. Conclusion The current meta-analysis identified potential risk factors for PTE. The results may contribute to better prevention strategies and treatments for PTE.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.yebeh.2016.10.026

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xu, T., Yu, X., Ou, S., Liu, X., Yuan, J., Huang, H., Yang, J., He, L., & Chen, Y.
Affiliations
Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (CN)
Corresponding author
Chen, Yangmei
Venue
Epilepsy & Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-02
Volume
67
Pages
1-6
ISSN
1525-5050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2570560022
Cited by
113
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 2
FWCI
1.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epilepsy & Behavior (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation of China (81571259)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Epilepsy research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Keywords
post-traumatic epilepsy, traumatic brain injury, risk factors, alcohol abuse, post-traumatic amnesia, focal neurologic signs, loss of consciousness, skull fracture, midline shift, cerebral contusion, subdural hematoma, intracranial hemorrhage, sex differences
MeSH terms
Brain Injuries, Traumatic, Adult, Alcoholism, Cross-Sectional Studies, Epilepsy, Post-Traumatic, Female, Humans, Male, Risk Factors, Cohort Studies, Case-Control Studies, Databases, Factual, Neuroimaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review