-
Epilepsia Aug 2022This study was undertaken to review the reported performance of noninvasive wearable devices in detecting epileptic seizures and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This study was undertaken to review the reported performance of noninvasive wearable devices in detecting epileptic seizures and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES).
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reported up to November 15, 2021. We included studies that used video-electroencephalographic (EEG) monitoring as the gold standard to determine the sensitivity and false alarm rate (FAR) of noninvasive wearables for automated seizure detection.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight studies met the criteria for the systematic review, of which 23 were eligible for meta-analysis. These studies (1269 patients in total, median recording time = 52.9 h per patient) investigated devices for tonic-clonic seizures using wrist-worn and/or ankle-worn devices to measure three-dimensional accelerometry (15 studies), and/or wearable surface devices to measure electromyography (eight studies). The mean sensitivity for detecting tonic-clonic seizures was .91 (95% confidence interval [CI] = .85-.96, I = 83.8%); sensitivity was similar between the wrist-worn (.93) and surface devices (.90). The overall FAR was 2.1/24 h (95% CI = 1.7-2.6, I = 99.7%); FAR was higher in wrist-worn (2.5/24 h) than in wearable surface devices (.96/24 h). Three of the 23 studies also detected PNES; the mean sensitivity and FAR from these studies were 62.9% and .79/24 h, respectively. Four studies detected both focal and tonic-clonic seizures, and one study detected focal seizures only; the sensitivities ranged from 31.1% to 93.1% in these studies.
SIGNIFICANCE
Reported noninvasive wearable devices had high sensitivity but relatively high FARs in detecting tonic-clonic seizures during limited recording time in a video-EEG setting. Future studies should focus on reducing FAR, detection of other seizure types and PNES, and longer recording in the community.
Topics: Accelerometry; Electroencephalography; Epilepsy; Humans; Psychogenic Nonepileptic Seizures; Seizures; Wearable Electronic Devices
PubMed: 35545836
DOI: 10.1111/epi.17297 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2021This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2019. Catamenial epilepsy describes worsening seizures in relation to the menstrual cycle and may... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2019. Catamenial epilepsy describes worsening seizures in relation to the menstrual cycle and may affect around 40% of women with epilepsy. Vulnerable days of the menstrual cycle for seizures are perimenstrually (C1 pattern), at ovulation (C2 pattern), and during the luteal phase (C3 pattern). A reduction in progesterone levels premenstrually and reduced secretion during the luteal phase is implicated in catamenial C1 and C3 patterns. A reduction in progesterone has been demonstrated to reduce sensitivity to the inhibitory neurotransmitter in preclinical studies, hence increasing risk of seizures. A pre-ovulatory surge in oestrogen has been implicated in the C2 pattern of seizure exacerbation, although the exact mechanism by which this surge increases risk is uncertain. Current treatment practices include the use of pulsed hormonal (e.g. progesterone) and non-hormonal treatments (e.g. clobazam or acetazolamide) in women with regular menses, and complete cessation of menstruation using synthetic hormones (e.g. medroxyprogesterone (Depo-Provera) or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues (triptorelin and goserelin)) in women with irregular menses. Catamenial epilepsy and seizure exacerbation is common in women with epilepsy. Women may not receive appropriate treatment for their seizures because of uncertainty regarding which treatment works best and when in the menstrual cycle treatment should be taken, as well as the possible impact on fertility, the menstrual cycle, bone health, and cardiovascular health. This review aims to address these issues to inform clinical practice and future research.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of hormonal and non-hormonal treatments for seizures exacerbated by the menstrual cycle in women with regular or irregular menses. We synthesised the evidence from randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of hormonal and non-hormonal treatments in women with catamenial epilepsy of any pattern.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 20 July 2021 for the latest update: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 19 July 2021). CRS Web includes randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the specialised registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Cochrane Epilepsy. We used no language restrictions. We checked the reference lists of retrieved studies for additional reports of relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs and quasi-RCTs of blinded or open-label design that randomised participants individually (i.e. cluster-randomised trials were excluded). We included cross-over trials if each treatment period was at least 12 weeks in length and the trial had a suitable wash-out period. We included the following types of interventions: women with any pattern of catamenial epilepsy who received a hormonal or non-hormonal drug intervention in addition to an existing antiepileptic drug regimen for a minimum treatment duration of 12 weeks.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data on study design factors and participant demographics for the included studies. The primary outcomes of interest were: proportion seizure-free, proportion of responders (at least 50% decrease in seizure frequency from baseline), and change in seizure frequency. Secondary outcomes included: number of withdrawals, number of women experiencing adverse events of interest (seizure exacerbation, cardiac events, thromboembolic events, osteoporosis and bone health, mood disorders, sedation, menstrual cycle disorders, and fertility issues), and quality of life outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
Following title, abstract, and full-text screening, we included eight full-text articles reporting on four double-blind, placebo-controlled RCTs. We included two cross-over RCTs of pulsed norethisterone, and two parallel RCTs of pulsed progesterone recruiting a total of 192 women aged between 13 and 45 years with catamenial epilepsy. We found no RCTs for non-hormonal treatments of catamenial epilepsy or for women with irregular menses. Meta-analysis was not possible for the primary outcomes, therefore we undertook a narrative synthesis. For the two RCTs evaluating norethisterone versus placebo (24 participants), there were no reported treatment differences for change in seizure frequency. Outcomes for the proportion seizure-free and 50% responders were not reported. For the two RCTs evaluating progesterone versus placebo (168 participants), the studies reported conflicting results for the primary outcomes. One progesterone RCT reported no significant difference between progesterone 600 mg/day taken on day 14 to 28 and placebo with respect to 50% responders, seizure freedom rates, and change in seizure frequency for any seizure type. The other progesterone RCT reported a decrease in seizure frequency from baseline in the progesterone group that was significantly higher than the decrease in seizure frequency from baseline in the placebo group. The results of secondary efficacy outcomes showed no significant difference between groups in the pooled progesterone RCTs in terms of treatment withdrawal for any reason (pooled risk ratio (RR) 1.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 3.00, P = 0.18, I = 0%) or treatment withdrawals due to adverse events (pooled RR 2.91, 95% CI 0.53 to 16.17, P = 0.22, I = 0%). No treatment withdrawals were reported from the norethisterone RCTs. The RCTs reported limited information on adverse events, although one progesterone RCT reported no significant difference in the number of women experiencing adverse events (diarrhoea, dyspepsia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, nasopharyngitis, dizziness, headache, and depression). No studies reported on quality of life. We judged the evidence for outcomes related to the included progesterone RCTs to be of low to moderate certainty due to risk of bias, and for outcomes related to the included norethisterone RCTs to be of very low certainty due to serious imprecision and risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review provides very low-certainty evidence of no treatment difference between norethisterone and placebo, and moderate- to low-certainty evidence of no treatment difference between progesterone and placebo for catamenial epilepsy. However, as all the included studies were underpowered, important clinical effects cannot be ruled out. Our review highlights an overall deficiency in the literature base on the effectiveness of a wide range of other hormonal and non-hormonal interventions currently being used in practice, particularly for those women who do not have regular menses. Further clinical trials are needed in this area.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anticonvulsants; Epilepsy; Fatigue; Female; Humans; Menstruation; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures; Young Adult
PubMed: 34528245
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013225.pub3 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Dec 2013About 10% of seizures in children with epilepsy are typical absence seizures. Absence seizures have a significant impact on quality of life. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
About 10% of seizures in children with epilepsy are typical absence seizures. Absence seizures have a significant impact on quality of life.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for typical absence seizures in children? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to July 2013 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up to date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 18 RCTs or systematic reviews of RCTs that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: clonazepam, ethosuximide, gabapentin, lamotrigine, and valproate.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anticonvulsants; Child; Epilepsy, Absence; Ethosuximide; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Quality of Life; Seizures; Treatment Outcome; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 24351614
DOI: No ID Found -
Indian Journal of Dermatology,...Epileptic seizures were noted as one of the most overlooked manifestations in syphilis; therefore a few clinicians are concerned about the relationship between epilepsy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Epileptic seizures were noted as one of the most overlooked manifestations in syphilis; therefore a few clinicians are concerned about the relationship between epilepsy and syphilis. Our study sought to clarify the prevalence and clinical features of epileptic seizures in patients with syphilis.
METHODS
We retrieved relevant articles from different databases, using the keywords "syphilis and epilepsy" and then performed statistical analysis to characterize the relationship between these diseases.
RESULTS
Forty one articles were included in this study: eight described the prevalence of syphilis and epilepsy and the remaining 33 were case reports on syphilis with epileptic seizures. The meta-analysis included 1252 patients with syphilis. The pooled estimate of proportion of prevalence (95% confidence interval) was 0.1384 (0.0955-0.2005), and the proportion and heterogeneity showed different degrees of change among three subgroups. The systematic review included 46 cases of syphilis with epileptic seizures. Thirty two (80%) patients had motor seizures, among whom 20 (62.5%) had tonic-clonic seizures. In addition, 30 (75%) patients had impaired awareness and 18 (45%) had status seizures. Twenty five (62.5%) patients were 35-55 years of age, and 77.5% of the included patients were men. Thirty seven (97.4%) patients were seizure-free after anti-syphilis treatment.
LIMITATIONS
Research in this field has been conducted for a relatively short period and publication bias may exist. Furthermore, some patients with syphilis and epileptic seizures may not have received a clear diagnosis.
CONCLUSION
The proportion of prevalence was 0.1384. Most of the included patients were 35-55 years of age and had impaired awareness and motor seizures. Many patients with syphilis and epileptic seizure showed full recovery or the development of minor neurological sequelae, and nearly all patients were seizure-free after timely anti-syphilis treatment.
Topics: Epilepsy; Humans; Syphilis
PubMed: 34219436
DOI: 10.25259/IJDVL_681_19 -
Epilepsia Oct 2020A fundamental question in epilepsy surgery is how to delineate the margins of cortex that must be resected to result in seizure freedom. Whether and which areas showing...
OBJECTIVE
A fundamental question in epilepsy surgery is how to delineate the margins of cortex that must be resected to result in seizure freedom. Whether and which areas showing seizure activity early in ictus must be removed to avoid postoperative recurrence of seizures is an area of ongoing research. Seizure spread dynamics in the initial seconds of ictus are often correlated with postoperative outcome; there is neither a consensus definition of early spread nor a concise summary of the existing literature linking seizure spread to postsurgical seizure outcomes. The present study is intended to summarize the literature that links seizure spread to postoperative seizure outcome and to provide a framework for quantitative assessment of early seizure spread.
METHODS
A systematic review was carried out according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A Medline search identified clinical studies reporting data on seizure spread measured by intracranial electrodes, having at least 10 subjects and reporting at least 1-year postoperative outcome in the English literature from 1990 to 2019. Studies were evaluated regarding support for a primary hypothesis: Areas of early seizure spread represent cortex with seizure-generating potential.
RESULTS
The search yielded 4562 studies: 15 studies met inclusion criteria and 7 studies supported the primary hypothesis. The methods and metrics used to describe seizure spread were heterogenous. The timeframe of seizure spread associated with seizure outcome ranged from 1-14 seconds, with large, well-designed, retrospective studies pointing to 3-10 seconds as most likely to provide meaningful correlates of postoperative seizure freedom.
SIGNIFICANCE
The complex correlation between electrophysiologic seizure spread and the potential for seizure generation needs further elucidation. Prospective cohort studies or trials are needed to evaluate epilepsy surgery targeting cortex involved in the first 3-10 seconds of ictus.
Topics: Cerebral Cortex; Electrodes, Implanted; Electroencephalography; Epilepsy; Humans; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Seizures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32944952
DOI: 10.1111/epi.16668 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2023Corticosteroids have been used for the treatment of patients with epilepsy for more than 6 decades, based on the hypothesis of inflammation in the genesis and/or... (Review)
Review
Corticosteroids have been used for the treatment of patients with epilepsy for more than 6 decades, based on the hypothesis of inflammation in the genesis and/or promotion of epilepsy. We, therefore, aimed to provide a systematic overview of the use of corticosteroid regimes in childhood epilepsies in line with the PRISMA guidelines. We performed a structured literature search PubMed and identified 160 papers with only three randomized controlled trials excluding the substantial trials on epileptic spasms. Corticosteroid regimes, duration of treatment (days to several months), and dosage protocols were highly variable in these studies. Evidence supports the use of steroids in epileptic spasms; however, there is only limited evidence for a positive effect for other epilepsy syndromes, e.g., epileptic encephalopathy with spike-and-wave activity in sleep [(D)EE-SWAS] or drug-resistant epilepsies (DREs). In (D)EE-SWAS (nine studies, 126 patients), 64% of patients showed an improvement either in the EEG or in their language/cognition following various steroid treatment regimes. In DRE (15 studies, 436 patients), a positive effect with a seizure reduction in 50% of pediatric and adult patients and seizure freedom in 15% was identified; however, no recommendation can be drawn due to the heterozygous cohort. This review highlights the immense need for controlled studies using steroids, especially in DRE, to offer patients new treatment options.
PubMed: 36970534
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1142253 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2022This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review published in 2015. Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disorder, characterised by recurring, unprovoked seizures. Vagus... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review published in 2015. Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disorder, characterised by recurring, unprovoked seizures. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a neuromodulatory treatment that is used as an adjunctive therapy for treating people with drug-resistant epilepsy. VNS consists of chronic, intermittent electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve, delivered by a programmable pulse generator.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of VNS when used as add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS), and MEDLINE Ovid on 3 March 2022. We imposed no language restrictions. CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Epilepsy, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered parallel or cross-over, randomised, double-blind, controlled trials of VNS as add-on treatment, which compared high- and low-level stimulation (including three different stimulation paradigms: rapid, mild, and slow duty-cycle), and VNS stimulation versus no stimulation, or a different intervention. We considered adults or children with drug-resistant focal seizures who were either not eligible for surgery, or who had failed surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard Cochrane methods, assessing the following outcomes: 1. 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency 2. Treatment withdrawal (any reason) 3. Adverse effects 4. Quality of life (QoL) 5. Cognition 6. Mood
MAIN RESULTS
We did not identify any new studies for this update, therefore, the conclusions are unchanged. We included the five randomised controlled trials (RCT) from the last update, with a total of 439 participants. The baseline phase ranged from 4 to 12 weeks, and double-blind treatment phases from 12 to 20 weeks. We rated two studies at an overall low risk of bias, and three at an overall unclear risk of bias, due to lack of reported information about study design. Effective blinding of studies of VNS is difficult, due to the frequency of stimulation-related side effects, such as voice alteration. The risk ratio (RR) for 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency was 1.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 2.64; 4 RCTs, 373 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), showing that high frequency VNS was over one and a half times more effective than low frequency VNS. The RR for treatment withdrawal was 2.56 (95% CI 0.51 to 12.71; 4 RCTs, 375 participants; low-certainty evidence). Results for the top five reported adverse events were: hoarseness RR 2.17 (99% CI 1.49 to 3.17; 3 RCTs, 330 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); cough RR 1.09 (99% CI 0.74 to 1.62; 3 RCTs, 334 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); dyspnoea RR 2.45 (99% CI 1.07 to 5.60; 3 RCTs, 312 participants; low-certainty evidence); pain RR 1.01 (99% CI 0.60 to 1.68; 2 RCTs; 312 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); paraesthesia 0.78 (99% CI 0.39 to 1.53; 2 RCTs, 312 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Results from two studies (312 participants) showed that a small number of favourable QOL effects were associated with VNS stimulation, but results were inconclusive between high- and low-level stimulation groups. One study (198 participants) found inconclusive results between high- and low-level stimulation for cognition on all measures used. One study (114 participants) found the majority of participants showed an improvement in mood on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale compared to baseline, but results between high- and low-level stimulation were inconclusive. We found no important heterogeneity between studies for any of the outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
VNS for focal seizures appears to be an effective and well-tolerated treatment. Results of the overall efficacy analysis show that high-level stimulation reduced the frequency of seizures better than low-level stimulation. There were very few withdrawals, which suggests that VNS is well tolerated. Adverse effects associated with implantation and stimulation were primarily hoarseness, cough, dyspnoea, pain, paraesthesia, nausea, and headache, with hoarseness and dyspnoea more likely to occur with high-level stimulation than low-level stimulation. However, the evidence for these outcomes is limited, and of moderate to low certainty. Further high-quality research is needed to fully evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of VNS for drug-resistant focal seizures.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Child; Cough; Drug Resistant Epilepsy; Drug Therapy, Combination; Dyspnea; Hoarseness; Humans; Pain; Paresthesia; Seizures; Vagus Nerve Stimulation
PubMed: 35833911
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002896.pub3 -
Journal of Medical Toxicology :... Jul 2022Cannabis' effect on seizure activity is an emerging topic that remains without consensus and merits further investigation. We therefore performed a scoping review to... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Cannabis' effect on seizure activity is an emerging topic that remains without consensus and merits further investigation. We therefore performed a scoping review to identify the available evidence and knowledge gaps within the existing literature on cannabis product exposures as a potential cause of seizures in humans.
METHODS
A scoping review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched over a 20-year period from the date of the database query (12/21/2020). Inclusion criteria were (1) English language original research articles, (2) inclusion of human subjects, and (3) either investigation of seizures as a part of recreational cannabinoid use OR of exogenous cannabinoids as a cause of seizures.
RESULTS
A total of 3104 unique articles were screened, of which 68 underwent full-text review, and 13 met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Ten of 11 studies evaluating acute cannabis exposures reported a higher seizure incidence than would be expected based on the prevalence of epilepsy in the general and pediatric populations (range 0.7-1.2% and 0.3-0.5% respectively). The remaining two studies demonstrated increased seizure frequency and/or seizure-related hospitalization in recreational cannabis users and those with cannabis use disorder.
CONCLUSIONS
This scoping review demonstrates that a body of literature describing seizures in the setting of cannabis exposure exists, but it has several limitations. Ten identified studies showed a higher than expected incidence of seizures in populations exposed to cannabis products. Based on the Bradford Hill criteria, delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) may be the causative xenobiotic for this phenomenon.
Topics: Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists; Cannabinoids; Cannabis; Child; Hallucinogens; Humans; Seizures
PubMed: 35352276
DOI: 10.1007/s13181-022-00886-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019Epilepsy is a common neurological condition, with an estimated incidence of 50 per 100,000 persons. People with epilepsy may present with various types of immunological... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Epilepsy is a common neurological condition, with an estimated incidence of 50 per 100,000 persons. People with epilepsy may present with various types of immunological abnormalities, such as low serum immunoglobulin A (IgA) levels, lack of the immunoglobulin G (IgG) subclass and identification of certain types of antibodies. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment may represent a valuable approach and its efficacy has important implications for epilepsy management. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011 and last updated in 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effects of IVIg on the frequency and duration of seizures, quality of life and adverse effects when used as monotherapy or as add-on treatment for people with epilepsy.
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) (20 December 2018), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 20 December 2018), Web of Science (1898 to 20 December 2018), ISRCTN registry (20 December 2018), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP, 20 December 2018), the US National Institutes of Health ClinicalTrials.gov (20 December 2018), and reference lists of articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of IVIg as monotherapy or add-on treatment in people with epilepsy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. Outcomes included percentage of people rendered seizure-free, 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, adverse effects, treatment withdrawal and quality of life.
MAIN RESULTS
We included one study (61 participants). The included study was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial which compared the treatment efficacy of IVIg as an add-on with a placebo add-on in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Seizure freedom was not reported in the study. There was no significant difference between IVIg and placebo in 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (RR 1.89, 95% CI 0.85 to 4.21; one study, 58 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study reported a statistically significant effect for global assessment in favour of IVIg (RR 3.29, 95% CI 1.13 to 9.57; one study, 60 participants; low-certainty evidence). No adverse effects were demonstrated. We found no randomised controlled trials that investigated the effects of IVIg monotherapy for epilepsy. Overall, the included study was rated at low to unclear risk of bias. Using GRADE methodology, the certainty of the evidence was rated as low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We cannot draw any reliable conclusions regarding the efficacy of IVIg as a treatment for epilepsy. Further randomised controlled trials are needed.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Epilepsy; Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31792946
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008557.pub4 -
Epilepsia May 2022In the last two decades new noninvasive mobile electroencephalography (EEG) solutions have been developed to overcome limitations of conventional clinical EEG and to... (Review)
Review
In the last two decades new noninvasive mobile electroencephalography (EEG) solutions have been developed to overcome limitations of conventional clinical EEG and to improve monitoring of patients with long-term conditions. Despite the availability of mobile innovations, their adoption is still very limited. The aim of this study is to review the current state-of-the-art and highlight the main advantages of adopting noninvasive mobile EEG solutions in clinical trials and research studies of people with epilepsy or suspected seizures. Device characteristics are described, and their evaluation is presented. Two authors independently performed a literature review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A combination of different digital libraries was used (Embase, MEDLINE, Global Health, PsycINFO and https://clinicaltrials.gov/). Twenty-three full-text, six conference abstracts, and eight webpages were included, where a total of 14 noninvasive mobile solutions were identified. Published studies demonstrated at different levels how EEG recorded via mobile EEG can be used for visual detection of EEG abnormalities and for the application of automatic-detection algorithms with acceptable specificity and sensitivity. When the quality of the signal was compared with scalp EEG, many similarities were found in the background activities and power spectrum. Several studies indicated that the experience of patients and health care providers using mobile EEG was positive in different settings. Ongoing trials are focused mostly on improving seizure-detection accuracy and also on testing and assessing feasibility and acceptability of noninvasive devices in the hospital and at home. This review supports the potential clinical value of noninvasive mobile EEG systems and their advantages in terms of time, technical support, cost, usability, and reliability when applied to seizure detection and management. On the other hand, the limitations of the studies confirmed that future research is needed to provide more evidence regarding feasibility and acceptability in different settings, as well as the data quality and detection accuracy of new noninvasive mobile EEG solutions.
Topics: Electroencephalography; Epilepsy; Health Personnel; Humans; Reproducibility of Results; Seizures
PubMed: 35271736
DOI: 10.1111/epi.17220