BACKGROUND: Continuous EEG (cEEG) may allow monitoring of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) for delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) and seizures, including non-convulsive seizures (NCSz), and non-convulsive status epilepticus (NCSE). We aimed to evaluate: (a) the diagnostic accuracy of cEEG as a confirmatory test, (b) the prognostic value of EEG patterns suggestive of seizures and DCI, and (c) the effectiveness of intensified neuromonitoring using cEEG in terms of improved clinical outcome following SAH. METHODS: A systematic review was performed with eligible studies selected from multiple indexing databases through June 2014. The methodological quality of these studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were identified, including cEEG data from 481 patients with aneurysmal SAH. NCSz were diagnosed in 7-18 % of patients; NCSE in 3-13 %. NCSE was associated with increased age (mean age 68 years) and mortality (82-100 %) compared to the entire patient population (53.9 years; mortality 13 %; p values <0.05). DCI was diagnosed in 20-46 % of patients. Quantitative EEG patterns suggestive of DCI included decreased alpha/delta ratio, relative alpha variability, and total power. All studies were subject to a high risk of bias concerning patient selection and cEEG methodology. CONCLUSIONS: cEEG monitoring following SAH detects an increased number of subclinical seizures and may predict DCI many hours in advance. NCSE is associated with high mortality and morbidity, whereas for DCI identified by cEEG this association is less clear. Prospective randomized controlled multicenter trials are needed to evaluate the benefits (or risks) of intensified treatment of seizures and DCI following SAH.
BACKGROUND: Continuous EEG (cEEG) may allow monitoring of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) for delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) and seizures, including non-convulsive seizures (NCSz), and non-convulsive status epilepticus (NCSE). We aimed to evaluate: (a) the diagnostic accuracy of cEEG as a confirmatory test, (b) the prognostic value of EEG patterns suggestive of seizures and DCI, and (c) the effectiveness of intensified neuromonitoring using cEEG in terms of improved clinical outcome following SAH. METHODS: A systematic review was performed with eligible studies selected from multiple indexing databases through June 2014. The methodological quality of these studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were identified, including cEEG data from 481 patients with aneurysmalSAH. NCSz were diagnosed in 7-18 % of patients; NCSE in 3-13 %. NCSE was associated with increased age (mean age 68 years) and mortality (82-100 %) compared to the entire patient population (53.9 years; mortality 13 %; p values <0.05). DCI was diagnosed in 20-46 % of patients. Quantitative EEG patterns suggestive of DCI included decreased alpha/delta ratio, relative alpha variability, and total power. All studies were subject to a high risk of bias concerning patient selection and cEEG methodology. CONCLUSIONS:cEEG monitoring following SAH detects an increased number of subclinical seizures and may predict DCI many hours in advance. NCSE is associated with high mortality and morbidity, whereas for DCI identified by cEEG this association is less clear. Prospective randomized controlled multicenter trials are needed to evaluate the benefits (or risks) of intensified treatment of seizures and DCI following SAH.
Authors: Jan Claassen; Lawrence J Hirsch; Jennifer A Frontera; Andres Fernandez; Michael Schmidt; Gregory Kapinos; John Wittman; E Sander Connolly; Ronald G Emerson; Stephan A Mayer Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2006 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Jens P Dreier; Johannes Woitzik; Martin Fabricius; Robin Bhatia; Sebastian Major; Chistoph Drenckhahn; Thomas-Nicolas Lehmann; Asita Sarrafzadeh; Lisette Willumsen; Jed A Hartings; Oliver W Sakowitz; Jörg H Seemann; Anja Thieme; Martin Lauritzen; Anthony J Strong Journal: Brain Date: 2006-10-25 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Jan Claassen; David Albers; J Michael Schmidt; Gian Marco De Marchis; Deborah Pugin; Christina Maria Falo; Stephan A Mayer; Serge Cremers; Sachin Agarwal; Mitchell S V Elkind; E Sander Connolly; Vanja Dukic; George Hripcsak; Neeraj Badjatia Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2014-05-16 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Jan Claassen; Lawrence J Hirsch; Kurt T Kreiter; Evelyn Y Du; E Sander Connolly; Ronald G Emerson; Stephan A Mayer Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Christoph Drenckhahn; Maren K L Winkler; Sebastian Major; Michael Scheel; Eun-Jeung Kang; Alexandra Pinczolits; Cristian Grozea; Jed A Hartings; Johannes Woitzik; Jens P Dreier Journal: Brain Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Enrico Bosco; Elisabetta Marton; Alberto Feletti; Bruno Scarpa; Pierluigi Longatti; Paolo Zanatta; Emanuele Giorgi; Carlo Sorbara Journal: Crit Care Date: 2011-07-15 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Eric S Rosenthal; Siddharth Biswal; Sahar F Zafar; Kathryn L O'Connor; Sophia Bechek; Apeksha V Shenoy; Emily J Boyle; Mouhsin M Shafi; Emily J Gilmore; Brandon P Foreman; Nicolas Gaspard; Thabele M Leslie-Mazwi; Jonathan Rosand; Daniel B Hoch; Cenk Ayata; Sydney S Cash; Andrew J Cole; Aman B Patel; M Brandon Westover Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2018-05-16 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: David Panczykowski; Matthew Pease; Yin Zhao; Gregory Weiner; William Ares; Elizabeth Crago; Brian Jankowitz; Andrew F Ducruet Journal: Stroke Date: 2016-06-14 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: J A Kim; E S Rosenthal; S Biswal; S Zafar; A V Shenoy; K L O'Connor; S C Bechek; J Valdery Moura; M M Shafi; A B Patel; S S Cash; M B Westover Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2017-01-29 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Payashi S Garry; Matthew J Rowland; Martyn Ezra; Mari Herigstad; Anja Hayen; Jamie W Sleigh; Jon Westbrook; Catherine E Warnaby; Kyle T S Pattinson Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 7.598