ArticleBMC neurology2024
Optimizing electroencephalogram duration for efficient detection of epileptiform abnormalities in diverse patient groups: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is no standardized EEG duration guideline for detecting epileptiform abnormalities in patients, and research on this topic is scarce. This study aims to determine an optimal EEG duration for efficient detection of epileptiform abnormalities across different patient groups.
methodsRetrospective analysis was performed on EEG recordings and clinical data of patients with the first seizure and epilepsy. Patients were categorized based on various factors, including the interval time since the last seizure, use of anti-seizure medication (ASM), and seizure frequency. The detection ratio (DR) of epileptiform abnormalities and latency time for their discovery were calculated. Statistical analyses, including chi-square tests, logistic regression, and survival analysis were utilized to illustrate DR and latency times.
resultsIn whole-night EEG recordings, the DR was 37.6% for the first seizure group and 57.4% for the epilepsy group. Although the maximum latency times were 720 min in both two groups, DR in the first seizure group was distinctly decreased beyond 300 min. Significant factors influencing the DR included the use of ASM in the first seizure group (P < 0.05) and seizure frequency in the epilepsy group (P < 0.001). For epilepsy patients who experience a seizure at least once a month or undergo timely EEG recordings (within 24 h after a seizure), the DR significantly increases, and the maximum latency time is reduced to 600 min (P < 0.001). Additionally, the DR was significantly reduced after 240 min in epilepsy patients who had been seizure-free for more than one year.
conclusionsIn this retrospective study, we observed a maximum latency of 720 min for detecting epileptiform abnormalities in whole-night EEG recordings. Notably, epilepsy patients with a higher seizure frequency or timely EEG recordings demonstrated both a higher detection ratio and a shorter maximum latency time. For patients exhibiting a low detection ratio, such as those experiencing their first seizure or those with epilepsy who have been seizure-free for more than a year, a shorter EEG duration is recommended. These findings underscore the importance of implementing customized EEG strategies to meet the specific needs of different patient groups.
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.