Search

Our goal was to assess the interrater agreement (IRA) of photoparoxysmal response (PPR) using the classification proposed by a task force of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE), and a simplified classification system proposed by our group. In addition, we evaluated IRA of epileptiform discharges (EDs) and the diagnostic significance of the electroencephalographic (EEG) abnormalities. We used EEG recordings from the European Reference Network (EpiCARE) and Standardized Computer-based Organized Reporting of EEG (SCORE). Six raters independently scored EEG recordings from 30 patients. We calculated the agreement coefficient (AC) for each feature. IRA of PPR using the classification proposed by the ILAE task force was only fair (AC = 0.38). This improved to a moderate agreement by using the simplified classification (AC = 0.56; P = .004). IRA of EDs was almost perfect (AC = 0.98), and IRA of scoring the diagnostic significance was moderate (AC = 0.51). Our results suggest that the simplified classification of the PPR is suitable for implementation in clinical practice., (© 2020 International League Against Epilepsy.)

Intermittent photic stimulation (IPS) is a common procedure performed in the electroencephalography (EEG) laboratory in children and adults to detect abnormal epileptogenic sensitivity to flickering light (i.e., photosensitivity). In practice, substantial variability in outcome is anecdotally found due to the many different methods used per laboratory and country. We believe that standardization of procedure, based on scientific and clinical data, should permit reproducible identification and quantification of photosensitivity. We hope that the use of our new algorithm will help in standardizing the IPS procedure, which in turn may more clearly identify and assist monitoring of patients with epilepsy and photosensitivity. Our algorithm goes far beyond that published in 1999 (Epilepsia, 1999a, 40, 75; Neurophysiol Clin, 1999b, 29, 318): it has substantially increased content, detailing technical and logistical aspects of IPS testing and the rationale for many of the steps in the IPS procedure. Furthermore, our latest algorithm incorporates the consensus of repeated scientific meetings of European experts in this field over a period of 6 years with feedback from general neurologists and epileptologists to improve its validity and utility. Accordingly, our European group has provided herein updated algorithms for two different levels of methodology: (1) requirements for defining photosensitivity in patients and in family members of known photosensitive patients and (2) requirements for tailored studies in patients with a clear history of visually induced seizures or complaints, and in those already known to be photosensitive., (Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2011 International League Against Epilepsy.)