Search

Abstract Objective A retrospective, single‐center study to analyze the determinants of a repeat continuous EEG (cEEG) monitoring during hospitalization and its outcomes using a matched case‐control study design. Methods Adults with a repeat cEEG session (cases) were matched by age (±3 years), gender, and mental status to patients with a single cEEG (controls) during hospitalization. Several clinical and EEG characteristics were analyzed to identify predictors of repeat cEEG. Repeat cEEG outcomes were analyzed based on its yield of electrographic seizure. We investigated the predictors of finding increased epileptic potential (degree of association with electrographic seizures) on the repeat cEEG, a marker for possible anti‐epileptic drugs (AEDs) management change. Results A total of 213 (8.6% of all unique cEEG patients) cases were included. A multivariable conditional logistic regression model comparing cases and controls showed that the presence of acute brain insult [odds ratio (OR) = 3.36, 95% CI = 1.26‐8.94, P = .015], longer hospital admission (OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.07‐1.15, P

Objective: A retrospective, single‐center study to analyze the determinants of a repeat continuous EEG (cEEG) monitoring during hospitalization and its outcomes using a matched case‐control study design. Methods: Adults with a repeat cEEG session (cases) were matched by age (±3 years), gender, and mental status to patients with a single cEEG (controls) during hospitalization. Several clinical and EEG characteristics were analyzed to identify predictors of repeat cEEG. Repeat cEEG outcomes were analyzed based on its yield of electrographic seizure. We investigated the predictors of finding increased epileptic potential (degree of association with electrographic seizures) on the repeat cEEG, a marker for possible anti‐epileptic drugs (AEDs) management change. Results: A total of 213 (8.6% of all unique cEEG patients) cases were included. A multivariable conditional logistic regression model comparing cases and controls showed that the presence of acute brain insult [odds ratio (OR) = 3.36, 95% CI = 1.26‐8.94, P = .015], longer hospital admission (OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.07‐1.15, P < .001) and being on AEDs at the end of index cEEG (OR = 4.0, 95% CI = 1.8‐8.87, P < .001) was determinants of a repeat cEEG. Among cases, 17 (8%) had electrographic seizures on repeat cEEG. Increased epileptic potential on repeat cEEG was noted in 34 (16%) cases. The latter is associated with change in etiology after the index cEEG (P = .03) and duration of repeat cEEG (P = .003) based on multivariable logistic regression model. AEDs were changed in 46 (21.6%) patients based on repeat cEEG findings. Significance: Repeat cEEG is not an uncommon practice. It leads to the diagnosis of electrographic seizures in a significant percentage of patients. With the potential of impacting AED management in 16%‐21% patients, it should be considered in high‐risk patients suffering acute brain insults undergoing prolonged hospitalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study reports the prevalence of Nonconvulsive Status Epilepticus (NCSE) in patients with altered mental status (AMS), and describes the clinical presentation, etiology, neurophysiological findings, neuroimaging, treatment, and outcome of NCSE in Qatar. Recording duration of continuous EEG monitoring was also discussed. Methods: This was a 3-year, prospective, hospital-based study involving patients with AMS and continuous EEG monitoring admitted to the Emergency and ICUs of Hamad Hospital, Qatar. Patients with confirmed diagnosis of NCSE were compared to the patients who did not show EEG and clinical features compatible with NCSE. Descriptive statistics in terms of mean with standard deviation, as well as frequency and percentages for categorical variables, were calculated; Student's t test as well as Chi-square tests or Fisher's exact tests were applied. Logistic regressions NSCE was performed using significance level 0.05 for independent variables at univariate analysis. Results: Number of patients with AMS and continuous EEG monitoring was 250. Number of patients with EEG compatible with NCSE: 65 (age range, 12–79 ys; m, 37; f, 28). Number of controls (defined as patients with EEG not compatible with NCSE): 185 (age range, 12–80 ys; m, 101; f, 84). Rate of occurrence of NCSE in patients with AMS: 26%. NCSE group was younger than controls (p <.001). Twenty patients with NCSE (31%) and 35 patients in the control group (19%) died. Death was more frequent in comatose NCSE compared to controls (p <.0007). NCSE proper and comatose NCSE had longer hospital stays than controls (p <.02 and p <.03, respectively). Complete recovery occurred in 26 NCSE patients (40%) and in 98 controls (53%) (p <.08). Twenty-one patients (31%) presented with refractory NCSE: 12 patients survived, 9 died. Conclusion: This was the first prospective study reporting a high number of NCSE in Qatar, a small country in the MENA region. This prevalence (26%) was in the middle range. NCSE patients did not perform better than controls, outcome being worse with comatose NCSE. NCSE is an emergent condition warranting expedited diagnosis and management. Three days of continuous EEG monitoring were able to diagnose most cases of NCSE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]