Satoshi Egawa1, Toru Hifumi2, Hidetoshi Nakamoto3, Yasuhiro Kuroda4, Yuichi Kubota5. 1. Neurointensive Care Unit, Department of Neurosurgery, and Stroke and Epilepsy Center, TMG Asaka Medical Center, Saitama, Japan. 2. Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, St. Luke's International Hospital, 9-1 Akashi-cho, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-8560, Japan. hifumitoru@gmail.com. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Saiseikai Kurihashi Hospital, Saitama, Japan. 4. Emergency Medical Center, Kagawa University Hospital, Kagawa, Japan. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, and Stroke and Epilepsy Center, TMG Asaka Medical Center, Saitama, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: Simplified continuous electroencephalogram (cEEG) monitoring has shown improvement in detecting seizures; however, it is insufficient in detecting abnormal EEG patterns, such as periodic discharges (PDs), rhythmic delta activity (RDA), spikes and waves (SW), and continuous slow wave (CS), as well as nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE). Headset-type continuous video EEG monitoring (HS-cv EEG monitoring; AE-120A EEG Headset™, Nihon Kohden, Tokyo, Japan) is a recently developed easy-to-use technology with eight channels. However, its ability to detect abnormal EEG patterns with raw EEG data has not been comprehensively evaluated. We aimed to examine the diagnostic accuracy of HS-cv EEG monitoring in detecting abnormal EEG patterns and NCSE in patients with altered mental status (AMS) with unknown etiology. We also evaluated the time required to initiate HS-cv EEG monitoring in these patients. METHODS: We prospectively observed and retrospectively examined patients who were admitted with AMS between January and December 2017 at the neurointensive care unit at Asakadai Central General Hospital, Saitama, Japan. We excluded patients whose data were missing for various reasons, such as difficulties in recording, and those whose consciousness had recovered between HS-cv EEG and conventional cEEG (C-cEEG) monitoring. For the included patients, we performed HS-cv EEG monitoring followed by C-cEEG monitoring. Definitive diagnosis was confirmed by C-cEEG monitoring with the international 10-20 system. As the primary outcome, we verified the sensitivity and specificity of HS-cv EEG monitoring in detecting abnormal EEG patterns including PDs, RDA, SW, and CS, in detecting the presence of PDs, and in detecting NCSE. As the secondary outcome, we calculated the time to initiate HS-cv EEG monitoring after making the decision. RESULTS: Fifty patients (76.9%) were included in the final analyses. The median age was 72 years, and 66% of the patients were male. The sensitivity and specificity of HS-cv EEG monitoring for detecting abnormal EEG patterns were 0.974 (0.865-0.999) and 0.909 (0.587-0.998), respectively, and for detecting PDs were 0.824 (0.566-0.926) and 0.970 (0.842-0.999), respectively. We diagnosed 13 (26%) patients with NCSE using HS-cv EEG monitoring and could detect NCSE with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.706 (0.440-0.897) and 0.970 (0.842-0.999), respectively. The median time needed to initiate HS-cv EEG was 57 min (5-142). CONCLUSIONS: HS-cv EEG monitoring is highly reliable in detecting abnormal EEG patterns, with moderate reliability for PDs and NCSE, and rapidly initiates cEEG monitoring in patients with AMS with unknown etiology.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: Simplified continuous electroencephalogram (cEEG) monitoring has shown improvement in detecting seizures; however, it is insufficient in detecting abnormal EEG patterns, such as periodic discharges (PDs), rhythmic delta activity (RDA), spikes and waves (SW), and continuous slow wave (CS), as well as nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE). Headset-type continuous video EEG monitoring (HS-cv EEG monitoring; AE-120A EEG Headset™, Nihon Kohden, Tokyo, Japan) is a recently developed easy-to-use technology with eight channels. However, its ability to detect abnormal EEG patterns with raw EEG data has not been comprehensively evaluated. We aimed to examine the diagnostic accuracy of HS-cv EEG monitoring in detecting abnormal EEG patterns and NCSE in patients with altered mental status (AMS) with unknown etiology. We also evaluated the time required to initiate HS-cv EEG monitoring in these patients. METHODS: We prospectively observed and retrospectively examined patients who were admitted with AMS between January and December 2017 at the neurointensive care unit at Asakadai Central General Hospital, Saitama, Japan. We excluded patients whose data were missing for various reasons, such as difficulties in recording, and those whose consciousness had recovered between HS-cv EEG and conventional cEEG (C-cEEG) monitoring. For the included patients, we performed HS-cv EEG monitoring followed by C-cEEG monitoring. Definitive diagnosis was confirmed by C-cEEG monitoring with the international 10-20 system. As the primary outcome, we verified the sensitivity and specificity of HS-cv EEG monitoring in detecting abnormal EEG patterns including PDs, RDA, SW, and CS, in detecting the presence of PDs, and in detecting NCSE. As the secondary outcome, we calculated the time to initiate HS-cv EEG monitoring after making the decision. RESULTS: Fifty patients (76.9%) were included in the final analyses. The median age was 72 years, and 66% of the patients were male. The sensitivity and specificity of HS-cv EEG monitoring for detecting abnormal EEG patterns were 0.974 (0.865-0.999) and 0.909 (0.587-0.998), respectively, and for detecting PDs were 0.824 (0.566-0.926) and 0.970 (0.842-0.999), respectively. We diagnosed 13 (26%) patients with NCSE using HS-cv EEG monitoring and could detect NCSE with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.706 (0.440-0.897) and 0.970 (0.842-0.999), respectively. The median time needed to initiate HS-cv EEG was 57 min (5-142). CONCLUSIONS: HS-cv EEG monitoring is highly reliable in detecting abnormal EEG patterns, with moderate reliability for PDs and NCSE, and rapidly initiates cEEG monitoring in patients with AMS with unknown etiology.
Entities:
Keywords:
Continuous electroencephalogram; Electroencephalography; Headset-type continuous video electroencephalography; Nonconvulsive status epilepticus; Periodic discharges
Authors: Jay Gavvala; Nicholas Abend; Suzette LaRoche; Cecil Hahn; Susan T Herman; Jan Claassen; Mícheál Macken; Stephan Schuele; Elizabeth Gerard Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2014-09-29 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: P M Vespa; M R Nuwer; V Nenov; E Ronne-Engstrom; D A Hovda; M Bergsneider; D F Kelly; N A Martin; D P Becker Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Andrea Park; Martin Chapman; Victoria A McCredie; Derek Debicki; Teneille Gofton; Loretta Norton; J Gordon Boyd Journal: Seizure Date: 2016-11-13 Impact factor: 3.184
Authors: A R Towne; E J Waterhouse; J G Boggs; L K Garnett; A J Brown; J R Smith; R J DeLorenzo Journal: Neurology Date: 2000-01-25 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: R J DeLorenzo; E J Waterhouse; A R Towne; J G Boggs; D Ko; G A DeLorenzo; A Brown; L Garnett Journal: Epilepsia Date: 1998-08 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Danny M W Hilkman; Walther N K A van Mook; Werner H Mess; Vivianne H J M van Kranen-Mastenbroek Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Andrea Biondi; Viviana Santoro; Pedro F Viana; Petroula Laiou; Deb K Pal; Elisa Bruno; Mark P Richardson Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2022-03-27 Impact factor: 6.740