Midline and Parasagittal Seizures are Rare in Adult Patients

Seizure Assessment and Forecasting With Efficient Rapid-EEG: A Retrospective Multicenter Comparative Effectiveness Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Approximately 30% of critically ill patients have seizures, and more than half of these seizures do not have an overt clinical correlate. EEG is needed to avoid missing seizures and prevent overtreatment with antiseizure medications. Conventional-EEG (cEEG) resources are logistically constrained and unable to meet their growing demand for seizure detection even in highly developed centers. Brief EEG screening with the validated 2HELPS2B algorithm was proposed as a method to triage cEEG resources, but it is hampered by cEEG requirements, primarily EEG technologists. Seizure risk-stratification using reduced time-to-application rapid response-EEG (rrEEG) systems (∼5 minutes) could be a solution. We assessed the noninferiority of the 2HELPS2B score on a 1-hour rrEEG compared to cEEG.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective EEG diagnostic accuracy study was conducted from October 1, 2021, to July 31, 2022. Chart and EEG review performed with consecutive sampling at 4 tertiary care centers, included records of patients ≥18 years old, from January 1, 2018, to June 20, 2022. Monte Carlo simulation power analysis yielded n = 500 rrEEG; for secondary outcomes n = 500 cEEG and propensity-score covariate matching was planned. Primary outcome, noninferiority of rrEEG for seizure risk prediction, was assessed per area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC). Noninferiority margin (0.05) was based on the 2HELPS2B validation study.

RESULTS

A total of 240 rrEEG with follow-on cEEG were obtained. Median age was 64 (interquartile range 22); 42% were female. 2HELPS2B on a 1-hour rrEEG met noninferiority to cEEG (AUC 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.90, p = 0.001). Secondary endpoints of comparison with a matched contemporaneous cEEG showed no significant difference in AUC (0.89, 95% CI 0.83-0.94, p = 0.31); in false negative rate for the 2HELPS2B = 0 group (p = 1.0) rrEEG (0.021, 95% CI 0-0.062), cEEG (0.016, 95% CI 0-0.048); nor in survival analyses.

DISCUSSION

2HELPS2B on 1-hour rrEEG is noninferior to cEEG for seizure prediction. Patients with low-risk (2HELPS2B = 0) may be able to forgo prolonged cEEG, allowing for increased monitoring of at-risk patients.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class II evidence that rrEEG is noninferior to cEEG in calculating the 2HELPS2B score to predict seizure risk.

Long-Term Home EEG Recording: Wearable and Implantable Devices

SUMMARY

Electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring has served as a cornerstone in the diagnostic and therapeutic evaluation of epilepsy since its development. This has been accomplished with short-term inpatient video-EEG hospitalization enabling observation of both the semiological and the electrographic features of seizures or with short-term home ambulatory EEG or video-EEG. The advantages of inpatient video-EEG monitoring are limited by high cost, inconvenience, and inability to monitor patients for long periods (weeks or months) as might be done in the outpatient setting. This limitation has impelled the development of wearable EEG devices, which aim to capture high-quality long-term EEG data in a user-friendly and unobtrusive manner. This review article aims to summarize three broad categories of wearable EEG devices, including scalp, subcutaneous, and intracranial EEG. In this review, we will discuss the features of each type of device and the implications for the management of epilepsy. This review does not aim to describe every wearable EEG device on the market but instead seeks to provide a broad overview of the various categories of device that are available, giving examples of each and those in development (with no intention to recommend or advocate for any particular product).

Economic review of point-of-care EEG

Aims: Point-of-care electroencephalogram (POC-EEG) is an acute care bedside screening tool for the identification of nonconvulsive seizures (NCS) and nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE). The objective of this narrative review is to describe the economic themes related to POC-EEG in the United States (US).Materials and methods: We examined peer-reviewed, published manuscripts on the economic findings of POC-EEG for bedside use in US hospitals, which included those found through targeted searches on PubMed and Google Scholar. Conference abstracts, gray literature offerings, frank advertisements, white papers, and studies conducted outside the US were excluded.Results: Twelve manuscripts were identified and reviewed; results were then grouped into four categories of economic evidence. First, POC-EEG usage was associated with clinical management amendments and antiseizure medication reductions. Second, POC-EEG was correlated with fewer unnecessary transfers to other facilities for monitoring and reduced hospital length of stay (LOS). Third, when identifying NCS or NCSE onsite, POC-EEG was associated with greater reimbursement in Medical Severity-Diagnosis Related Group coding. Fourth, POC-EEG may lower labor costs via decreasing after-hours requests to EEG technologists for conventional EEG (convEEG).Limitations: We conducted a narrative review, not a systematic review. The studies were observational and utilized one rapid circumferential headband system, which limited generalizability of the findings and indicated publication bias. Some sample sizes were small and hospital characteristics may not represent all US hospitals. POC-EEG studies in pediatric populations were also lacking. Ultimately, further research is justified.Conclusions: POC-EEG is a rapid screening tool for NCS and NCSE in critical care and emergency medicine with potential financial benefits through refining clinical management, reducing unnecessary patient transfers and hospital LOS, improving reimbursement, and mitigating burdens on healthcare staff and hospitals. Since POC-EEG has limitations (i.e. no video component and reduced montage), the studies asserted that it did not replace convEEG.

Stereo-EEG localization of midline onset seizures on scalp EEG

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to describe the sEEG-defined seizure onset zone (SOZ), seizure semiology, presurgical evaluations, surgical intervention and outcome in patients with midline onset noninvasive phase I monitoring.

METHODS

A single center sEEG database was reviewed to identify patients with seizures onset predominantly involving midline electrodes (FZ, CZ, PZ, OZ) on scalp EEG. Data abstracted included clinical factors, seizure semiology graded into lobar segmentation, imaging and electrographic findings, sEEG plan, interventions, and outcome.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were identified (8 males, median age of sEEG 28 years) out of 100 cases of sEEG performed from January 2015-September 2019. "Frontal lobe" seizure semiology was the most common. sEEG-defined SOZ were frontal (5), diffuse (1), multifocal (1), frontal and insular (1), frontal and cingulate (1), insular (1), cingulate (1), and mesial temporal (1). CZ and/or FZ scalp EEG changes were present for all patients with SOZ involving the frontal, cingulate, and insular regions. PZ/OZ scalp involvement was present in one patient with mesial temporal SOZ. Four patients underwent a definitive resective or ablative surgery, and the remaining patients underwent a palliative intervention. Of those with follow-up information available, 8/11 had seizure reduction by ≥ 50%, including 4 with an Engel I outcome. No clinical factors were associated with outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

SOZ for midline onset seizures from noninvasive phase I monitoring was most commonly in the frontal, cingulate, and insular regions. A complex cortical network between these regions may explain overlap in semiology and scalp EEG findings. While the number rendered seizure-free was limited, a significant proportion experienced a reasonably favorable outcome justifying use of sEEG to identify surgical options in these patients.

Comparing Seizures Captured by Rapid Response EEG and Conventional EEG Recordings in a Multicenter Clinical Study

Objective

A recent multicenter prospective study (DECIDE trial) examined the use of Ceribell Rapid Response EEG (Rapid-EEG) in the emergent evaluation and management of critically ill patients suspected to have non-convulsive seizures. We present a detailed, patient-level examination of seizures detected either on initial Rapid-EEG or subsequent conventional EEG within 24 h to investigate whether seizures were missed on Rapid-EEG due to the exclusion of midline/parasagittal coverage.

Methods

We identified from 164 patients studied in the DECIDE trial those who had seizures detected on Rapid-EEG but not conventional EEG (n = 6), conventional EEG but not Rapid-EEG (n = 4), or both Rapid-EEG and conventional EEG (n = 9). We examined the electrographic characteristics of ictal and interictal findings on both devices, especially their detection in lateral or midline/parasagittal chains, and patient clinical histories to identify contributors toward discordant seizure detection.

Results

Seizures detected on both EEG systems had similar electrographic appearance and laterality. Seizures detected only on conventional EEG (within 24 h following Rapid-EEG) were visible in the temporal chains, and external clinical factors (e.g., treatment with anti-seizure medications, sedation, and duration of recordings) explained the delayed presentation of seizures. Patients with seizures detected only by Rapid-EEG were treated with anti-seizure medications, and subsequent conventional EEG detected interictal highly epileptiform patterns with similar laterality.

Conclusions

Our case series demonstrates that electrographic data obtained from initial Rapid-EEG and subsequent conventional EEG monitoring are largely concordant relative to morphology and laterality. These findings are valuable to inform future investigation of abbreviated EEG systems to optimize management of suspected non-convulsive seizures and status epilepticus. Future, larger studies could further investigate the value of Rapid-EEG findings for forecasting and predicting seizures in long-term EEG recordings.

Evaluating the Clinical Impact of Rapid Response Electroencephalography: The DECIDE Multicenter Prospective Observational Clinical Study

OBJECTIVES

To measure the diagnostic accuracy, timeliness, and ease of use of Ceribell rapid response electroencephalography. We assessed physicians' diagnostic assessments and treatment plans before and after rapid response electroencephalography assessment. Primary outcomes were changes in physicians' diagnostic and therapeutic decision making and their confidence in these decisions based on the use of the rapid response electroencephalography system. Secondary outcomes were time to electroencephalography, setup time, ease of use, and quality of electroencephalography data.

DESIGN

Prospective multicenter nonrandomized observational study.

SETTING

ICUs in five academic hospitals in the United States.

SUBJECTS

Patients with encephalopathy suspected of having nonconvulsive seizures and physicians evaluating these patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Physician bedside assessment of sonified electroencephalography (30 s from each hemisphere) and visual electroencephalography (60 s) using rapid response electroencephalography.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Physicians (29 fellows or residents, eight attending neurologists) evaluated 181 ICU patients; complete clinical and electroencephalography data were available in 164 patients (average 58.6 ± 18.7 yr old, 45% females). Relying on rapid response electroencephalography information at the bedside improved the sensitivity (95% CI) of physicians' seizure diagnosis from 77.8% (40.0%, 97.2%) to 100% (66.4%, 100%) and the specificity (95% CI) of their diagnosis from 63.9% (55.8%, 71.4%) to 89% (83.0%, 93.5%). Physicians' confidence in their own diagnosis and treatment plan were also improved. Time to electroencephalography (median [interquartile range]) was 5 minutes (4-10 min) with rapid response electroencephalography while the conventional electroencephalography was delayed by several hours (median [interquartile range] delay = 239 minutes [134-471 min] [p < 0.0001 using Wilcoxon signed rank test]). The device was rated as easy to use (mean ± SD: 4.7 ± 0.6 [1 = difficult, 5 = easy]) and was without serious adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid response electroencephalography enabled timely and more accurate assessment of patients in the critical care setting. The use of rapid response electroencephalography may be clinically beneficial in the assessment of patients with high suspicion for nonconvulsive seizures and status epilepticus.

Monitoring the Burden of Seizures and Highly Epileptiform Patterns in Critical Care with a Novel Machine Learning Method

INTRODUCTION

Current electroencephalography (EEG) practice relies on interpretation by expert neurologists, which introduces diagnostic and therapeutic delays that can impact patients' clinical outcomes. As EEG practice expands, these experts are becoming increasingly limited resources. A highly sensitive and specific automated seizure detection system would streamline practice and expedite appropriate management for patients with possible nonconvulsive seizures. We aimed to test the performance of a recently FDA-cleared machine learning method (Claritγ, Ceribell Inc.) that measures the burden of seizure activity in real time and generates bedside alerts for possible status epilepticus (SE).

METHODS

We retrospectively identified adult patients (n = 353) who underwent evaluation of possible seizures with Rapid Response EEG system (Rapid-EEG, Ceribell Inc.). Automated detection of seizure activity and seizure burden throughout a recording (calculated as the percentage of ten-second epochs with seizure activity in any 5-min EEG segment) was performed with Claritγ, and various thresholds of seizure burden were tested (≥ 10% indicating ≥ 30 s of seizure activity in the last 5 min, ≥ 50% indicating ≥ 2.5 min of seizure activity, and ≥ 90% indicating ≥ 4.5 min of seizure activity and triggering a SE alert). The sensitivity and specificity of Claritγ's real-time seizure burden measurements and SE alerts were compared to the majority consensus of at least two expert neurologists.

RESULTS

Majority consensus of neurologists labeled the 353 EEGs as normal or slow activity (n = 249), highly epileptiform patterns (HEP, n = 87), or seizures [n = 17, nine longer than 5 min (e.g., SE), and eight shorter than 5 min]. The algorithm generated a SE alert (≥ 90% seizure burden) with 100% sensitivity and 93% specificity. The sensitivity and specificity of various thresholds for seizure burden during EEG recordings for detecting patients with seizures were 100% and 82% for ≥ 50% seizure burden and 88% and 60% for ≥ 10% seizure burden. Of the 179 EEG recordings in which the algorithm detected no seizures, seizures were identified by the expert reviewers in only two cases, indicating a negative predictive value of 99%.

DISCUSSION

Claritγ detected SE events with high sensitivity and specificity, and it demonstrated a high negative predictive value for distinguishing nonepileptiform activity from seizure and highly epileptiform activity.

CONCLUSIONS

Ruling out seizures accurately in a large proportion of cases can help prevent unnecessary or aggressive over-treatment in critical care settings, where empiric treatment with antiseizure medications is currently prevalent. Claritγ's high sensitivity for SE and high negative predictive value for cases without epileptiform activity make it a useful tool for triaging treatment and the need for urgent neurological consultation.

Diagnostic Value of Electroencephalography with Ten Electrodes in Critically Ill Patients

BACKGROUND

In critical care settings, electroencephalography (EEG) with reduced number of electrodes (reduced montage EEG, rm-EEG) might be a timely alternative to the conventional full montage EEG (fm-EEG). However, past studies have reported variable accuracies for detecting seizures using rm-EEG. We hypothesized that the past studies did not distinguish between differences in sensitivity from differences in classification of EEG patterns by different readers. The goal of the present study was to revisit the diagnostic value of rm-EEG when confounding issues are accounted for.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected 212 adult EEGs recorded at Massachusetts General Hospital and reviewed by two epileptologists with access to clinical, trending, and video information. In Phase I of the study, we re-configured the first 4 h of the EEGs in lateral circumferential montage with ten electrodes and asked new readers to interpret the EEGs without access to any other ancillary information. We compared their rating to the reading of hospital clinicians with access to ancillary information. In Phase II, we measured the accuracy of the same raters reading representative samples of the discordant EEGs in full and reduced configurations presented randomly by comparing their performance to majority consensus as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Of the 95 EEGs without seizures in the selected fm-EEG, readers of rm-EEG identified 92 cases (97%) as having no seizure activity. Of 117 EEGs with "seizures" identified in the selected fm-EEG, none of the cases was labeled as normal on rm-EEG. Readers of rm-EEG reported pathological activity in 100% of cases, but labeled them as seizures (N = 77), rhythmic or periodic patterns (N = 24), epileptiform spikes (N = 7), or burst suppression (N = 6). When the same raters read representative epochs of the discordant EEG cases (N = 43) in both fm-EEG and rm-EEG configurations, we found high concordance (95%) and intra-rater agreement (93%) between fm-EEG and rm-EEG diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduced EEG with ten electrodes in circumferential configuration preserves key features of the traditional EEG system. Discrepancies between rm-EEG and fm-EEG as reported in some of the past studies can be in part due to methodological factors such as choice of gold standard diagnosis, asymmetric access to ancillary clinical information, and inter-rater variability rather than detection failure of rm-EEG as a result of electrode reduction per se.