Search

Objective: Wearable nonelectroencephalographic biosignal recordings captured from the wrist offer enormous potential for seizure monitoring. However, signal quality remains a challenging factor affecting data reliability. Models trained for seizure detection depend on the quality of recordings in peri‐ictal periods in performing a feature‐based separation of ictal periods from interictal periods. Thus, this study aims to investigate the effect of epileptic seizures on signal quality, ensuring accurate and reliable monitoring. Methods: This study assesses the signal quality of wearable data during peri‐ictal phases of generalized tonic–clonic and focal to bilateral tonic–clonic seizures (TCS), focal motor seizures (FMS), and focal nonmotor seizures (FNMS). We evaluated accelerometer (ACC) activity and the signal quality of electrodermal activity (EDA) and blood volume pulse (BVP) data. Additionally, we analyzed the influence of peri‐ictal movements as assessed by ACC (ACC activity) on signal quality and examined intraictal subphases of focal to bilateral TCS. Results: We analyzed 386 seizures from 111 individuals in three international epilepsy monitoring units. BVP signal quality and ACC activity levels differed between all seizure types. We found the largest decrease in BVP signal quality and increase in ACC activity when comparing the ictal phase to the pre‐ and postictal phases for TCS. Additionally, ACC activity was strongly negatively correlated with BVP signal quality for TCS and FMS, and weakly for FNMS. Intraictal analysis revealed that tonic and clonic subphases have the lowest BVP signal quality and the highest ACC activity. Significance: Motor elements of seizures significantly impair BVP signal quality, but do not have significant effect on EDA signal quality, as assessed by wrist‐worn wearables. The results underscore the importance of signal quality assessment methods and careful selection of robust modalities to ensure reliable seizure detection. Future research is needed to explain whether seizure detection models' decisions are based on signal responses induced by physiological processes as opposed to artifacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the advancements in seizure forecasting tools, biomarkers, and devices. It discusses the use of data collection methods and computational algorithms to identify seizure patterns and likelihood. Challenges such as false alarms and individual variability in seizure patterns are acknowledged. The article emphasizes the importance of identifying biomarkers that capture the complex nature of physiological signals. It also highlights the need for standardized datasets and the potential of wearable devices for more accurate seizure forecasting. The authors declare no financial support or conflicts of interest, and provide references for further reading. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: Home monitoring of 3‐Hz spike–wave discharges (SWDs) in patients with refractory absence epilepsy could improve clinical care by replacing the inaccurate seizure diary with objective counts. We investigated the use and performance of the Sensor Dot (Byteflies) wearable in persons with absence epilepsy in their home environment. Methods: Thirteen participants (median age = 22 years, 11 female) were enrolled at the university hospitals of Leuven and Freiburg. At home, participants had to attach the Sensor Dot and behind‐the‐ear electrodes to record two‐channel electroencephalogram (EEG), accelerometry, and gyroscope data. Ground truth annotations were created during a visual review of the full Sensor Dot recording. Generalized SWDs were annotated if they were 3 Hz and at least 3 s on EEG. Potential 3‐Hz SWDs were flagged by an automated seizure detection algorithm, (1) using only EEG and (2) with an additional postprocessing step using accelerometer and gyroscope to discard motion artifacts. Afterward, two readers (W.V.P. and L.S.) reviewed algorithm‐labeled segments and annotated true positive detections. Sensitivity, precision, and F1 score were calculated. Patients had to keep a seizure diary and complete questionnaires about their experiences. Results: Total recording time was 394 h 42 min. Overall, 234 SWDs were captured in 11 of 13 participants. Review of the unimodal algorithm‐labeled recordings resulted in a mean sensitivity of.84, precision of.93, and F1 score of.89. Visual review of the multimodal algorithm‐labeled segments resulted in a similar F1 score and shorter review time due to fewer false positive labels. Participants reported that the device was comfortable and that they would be willing to wear it on demand of their neurologist, for a maximum of 1 week or with intermediate breaks. Significance: The Sensor Dot improved seizure documentation at home, relative to patient self‐reporting. Additional benefits were the short review time and the patients' device acceptance due to user‐friendliness and comfortability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study describes a generalized cross‐patient seizure‐forecasting approach using recurrent neural networks with ultra‐long‐term subcutaneous EEG (sqEEG) recordings. Data from six patients diagnosed with refractory epilepsy and monitored with an sqEEG device were used to develop a generalized algorithm for seizure forecasting using long short‐term memory (LSTM) deep‐learning classifiers. Electrographic seizures were identified by a board‐certified epileptologist. One‐minute data segments were labeled as preictal or interictal based on their relationship to confirmed seizures. Data were separated into training and testing data sets, and to compensate for the unbalanced data ratio in training, noise‐added copies of preictal data segments were generated to expand the training data set. The mean and standard deviation (SD) of the training data were used to normalize all data, preserving the pseudo‐prospective nature of the analysis. Different architecture classifiers were trained and tested using a leave‐one‐patient‐out cross‐validation method, and the area under the receiver‐operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) was used to evaluate the performance classifiers. The importance of each input signal was evaluated using a leave‐one‐signal‐out method with repeated training and testing for each classifier. Cross‐patient classifiers achieved performance significantly better than chance in four of the six patients and an overall mean AUC of 0.602 ± 0.126 (mean ± SD). A time in warning of 37.386% ± 5.006% (mean ± std) and sensitivity of 0.691 ± 0.068 (mean ± std) were observed for patients with better than chance results. Analysis of input channels showed a significant contribution (p <.05) by the Fourier transform of signals channels to overall classifier performance. The relative contribution of input signals varied among patients and architectures, suggesting that the inclusion of all signals contributes to robustness in a cross‐patient classifier. These early results show that it is possible to forecast seizures training with data from different patients using two‐channel ultra‐long‐term sqEEG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: One of the most disabling aspects of living with chronic epilepsy is the unpredictability of seizures. Cumulative research in the past decades has advanced our understanding of the dynamics of seizure risk. Technological advances have recently made it possible to record pertinent biological signals, including electroencephalogram (EEG), continuously. We aimed to assess whether patient‐specific seizure forecasting is possible using remote, minimally invasive ultra‐long‐term subcutaneous EEG. Methods: We analyzed a two‐center cohort of ultra‐long‐term subcutaneous EEG recordings, including six patients with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy monitored for 46–230 days with median 18 h/day of recorded data, totaling >11 000 h of EEG. Total electrographic seizures identified by visual review ranged from 12 to 36 per patient. Three candidate subject‐specific long short‐term memory network deep learning classifiers were trained offline and pseudoprospectively on preictal (1 h before) and interictal (>1 day from seizures) EEG segments. Performance was assessed relative to a random predictor. Periodicity of the final forecasts was also investigated with autocorrelation. Results: Depending on each architecture, significant forecasting performance was achieved in three to five of six patients, with overall mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of.65–.74. Significant forecasts showed sensitivity ranging from 64% to 80% and time in warning from 10.9% to 44.4%. Overall, the output of the forecasts closely followed patient‐specific circadian patterns of seizure occurrence. Significance: This study demonstrates proof‐of‐principle for the possibility of subject‐specific seizure forecasting using a minimally invasive subcutaneous EEG device capable of ultra‐long‐term at‐home recordings. These results are encouraging for the development of a prospective seizure forecasting trial with minimally invasive EEG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]