ArticleEpilepsia2026
Intracranial electroencephalographic approaches in the intensive care unit: Safety, feasibility, and coverage.
Article in Epilepsia, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveNonconvulsive epileptic activity is common after acute brain injury and contributes to neuronal injury and poor outcomes. Although intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) improves detection compared with surface EEG (suEEG), it currently relies on focal recordings of epileptic dynamics. We prospectively evaluated multielectrode iEEG strategies designed to achieve large-scale cortical and deep brain coverage in critically ill patients.
methodsIn a prospective cohort of adults with acute brain injury requiring invasive neuromonitoring, we implemented four depth electrode-based iEEG techniques: three electrocorticographic approaches (open subdural, burr hole subdural, and foramen ovale) and one stereotactic (transcortical) approach. The primary objective was to establish and quantify the extent and durability of cortical recordings. Additional assessments included safety, feasibility, and management impact. Electrode localization was performed in MNI305 space, and recording longevity was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models.
resultsThirty patients with severe brain injury underwent implantation of 64 electrodes (772 contacts), yielding 361 total iEEG recording days across heterogeneous etiologies and surgical settings. Multielectrode implantation enabled distributed sampling spanning multilobar frontoparietotemporal cortical clusters. Overall, 72% of electrodes sampled cortical convexity alone, whereas 28% incorporated deep targets, including mesial temporal and orbitofrontal regions. Recording durability differed by implantation strategy (log-rank p = .0002), with a mean combined iEEG-suEEG monitoring duration of 14.5 days per patient. Implantation was successful in >95% of electrodes, monitoring started within 24 h postoperatively in 88%, and the per-electrode risk of a causally related adverse event was 3.1%, without hemorrhagic complications. iEEG influenced treatment initiation or escalation in 32% of monitored patients. SIGNIFICANCE: Multielectrode iEEG strategies enable durable, large-scale cortical sampling in acute brain injury while remaining feasible and safe in the intensive care unit. By shifting from focal to distributed spatial sampling, these approaches provide a conceptual framework for improving detection of epileptic activity in critically ill patients.
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.