ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023
Assessing 72 h vs. 24 h of long-term video-EEG monitoring to confirm the diagnosis of epilepsy: a retrospective observational study.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Electroencephalography in stroke Care: From acute monitoring to Post-Stroke epilepsy.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2026Review
- Focal Autonomic Seizures Manifesting With Prevailing Signs of Gastrointestinal Disorder in Dogs.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Paroxysmal seizure-like events can be a diagnostic challenge. Inpatient video-electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring (VEM) can be a valuable diagnostic tool, but recommendations for the minimal duration of VEM to confirm or rule out epilepsy are inconsistent. In this study, we aim to determine whether VEM of 48 or 72 h was superior to 24 h. Methods: In this monocentric, retrospective study, we included 111 patients with paroxysmal, seizure-like events who underwent at least 72 h of VEM. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) Preliminary workup was inconclusive; (2) VEM admission occurred to confirm a diagnosis; (3) At discharge, the diagnosis of epilepsy was conclusively established. We analyzed the VEM recordings to determine the exact time point of the first occurrence of epileptic abnormalities (EAs; defined as interictal epileptiform discharges or electrographic seizures). Subgroup analyses were performed for epilepsy types and treatment status. Results: In our study population, 69.4% (77/111) of patients displayed EAs during VEM. In this group, the first occurrence of EAs was observed within 24 h in 92.2% (71/77) of patients and within 24-72 h in 7.8% (6/77). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of EA between medicated and non-medicated patients or between focal, generalized epilepsies and epilepsies of unknown type. Of the 19 recorded spontaneous electroclinical seizures, 6 (31.6%) occurred after 24 h. Discussion: A VEM of 24 h may be sufficient in the diagnostic workup of paroxysmal seizure-like events under most circumstances. Considering the few cases of first EA in the timeframe between 24 and 72 h, a prolonged VEM may be useful in cases with a high probability of epilepsy or where other strategies like sleep-EEG or ambulatory EEG show inconclusive results. Prolonged VEM increases the chance of recording spontaneous seizures. Our study also highlights a high share of subjects with epilepsy that do not exhibit EAs during 72 h of VEM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.