Kaplan Peter W
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Epilepsy and Electrophysiology Monitoring Unit, Baltimore, Maryland 21225, USA.
Am J Electroneurodiagnostic Technol. 2006 Jun;46(2):81-97.
EEG recording in the intensive care setting presents a number of technical challenges. It is essential to differentiate artifact from pathophysiologic EEG changes that would suggest encephalopathy, epileptiform activity, or seizures. There are particular patterns typical of deepening encephalopathy, as well as, coma patterns that have diagnostic and prognostic significance (e.g., spindle coma, alpha coma, burst suppression activity, and triphasic waves). Epileptiform patterns, including periodic lateralized epileptiform discharges (PLEDs), bilateral independent periodic lateralized epileptiform discharges (BIPLEDs), and generalized periodic epileptiform discharges (GPEDs), present particular challenges as there is a gray-zone between interictal patterns and the evolving (usually faster) patterns of nonconvulsive seizures. Accurate use of EEG in the intensive care unit requires optimal EEG technical expertise in performing the study, and appropriate interpretation by a trained electrophysiologist.
在重症监护环境中进行脑电图(EEG)记录存在一些技术挑战。区分伪迹与提示脑病、癫痫样活动或癫痫发作的病理生理EEG变化至关重要。存在典型的深度脑病特定模式,以及具有诊断和预后意义的昏迷模式(例如,纺锤波昏迷、α昏迷、爆发抑制活动和三相波)。癫痫样模式,包括周期性一侧性癫痫样放电(PLEDs)、双侧独立周期性一侧性癫痫样放电(BIPLEDs)和全身性周期性癫痫样放电(GPEDs),带来了特殊挑战,因为发作间期模式与非惊厥性癫痫发作的演变(通常更快)模式之间存在灰色地带。在重症监护病房准确使用EEG需要在进行研究时具备最佳的EEG技术专长,并由训练有素的电生理学家进行适当解读。