Department of Neurology, College of Medicine, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
Ann Afr Med. 2024 Apr 1;23(2):160-168. doi: 10.4103/aam.aam_60_23. Epub 2024 May 1.
The objective of this study was to observe the effects of various clinical factors on the activation and appearance of epileptiform abnormalities (EAs) in routine electroencephalography (rEEG) by different provocation methods.
This observational study involved a review of 136 patients presented for EEG recording due to various indications and their EEG showing EAs during various provocation methods.
Generalized spike-wave discharges (GSWDs) were the most frequent activated epileptiform pattern observed in, 81 (59.1%) recordings. This pattern was seen mainly in females 49 (P = 0.00), in patients with generalized seizures 48 (P = 0.00), in prolonged EEG records 3 (P = 0.03), and in both genetic 35 (P = 0.00) and lesional epilepsies 21 (P = 0.00). Focal sharp waves with bilateral synchrony (FSWSBS) were the most activated ictal pattern (P = 0.00). Ictal EAs after hyperventilation (HV) (P = 0.03) and intermittent photic stimulation (IPS) (P = 0.01) were mainly observed in patients with uncontrolled seizures (P = 0.00), and immune-mediated epilepsy (P = 0.02). Females sex (odds ratio [OR]: 1.33, confidence interval [CI]: 0.6-2.6; P = 0.25), bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (OR: 1.17, CI: 0.5-2.4; P = 0.31) and lesional epilepsies (OR: 1.45, CI: 0.7-2.9; P = 0.20) had risk of activation of EAs by provocation methods; however this risk was not statistically significant. While sleep deprivation (SD) (OR: 6.33, CI: 2.2-18.2; P = 0.00), nonrapid eye movement sleep (NREM) (OR: 2.41, CI: 1.0-5.4; P = 0.00), and prolong EEG recording (OR: 1.91, CI: 0.9-3.9; P = 0.04) were leading to a statistically significant risk of activation and appearances of EAs due to provocation.
Different provocation methods can activate and augment the variety of EEG patterns of diverse clinical significance. Detection of activated ictal EAs is dependent on various patient factors, including seizure control, and the provocation method applied. Further larger prospective cohort studies with adequate sample sizes are warranted.
本研究旨在观察不同诱发方法对常规脑电图(rEEG)中各种临床因素对癫痫样异常(EAs)的激活和出现的影响。
这是一项观察性研究,回顾了 136 名因各种原因就诊并在各种诱发方法下脑电图出现 EAs 的患者。
在 81 份(59.1%)记录中观察到最常见的激活癫痫样模式是全面性棘波-慢波放电(GSWDs)。这种模式主要出现在女性 49 例(P=0.00)、全面性发作患者 48 例(P=0.00)、脑电图记录时间延长 3 例(P=0.03)、遗传 35 例(P=0.00)和病变性癫痫 21 例(P=0.00)。双侧同步性局灶性尖波(FSWSBS)是最活跃的发作模式(P=0.00)。过度换气(HV)(P=0.03)和间歇性光刺激(IPS)(P=0.01)后发作性 EAs 主要发生在控制不佳的癫痫发作患者中(P=0.00),以及免疫介导性癫痫(P=0.02)。女性(比值比[OR]:1.33,置信区间[CI]:0.6-2.6;P=0.25)、双侧强直-阵挛性发作(OR:1.17,CI:0.5-2.4;P=0.31)和病变性癫痫(OR:1.45,CI:0.7-2.9;P=0.20)的促发方法有激活 EAs 的风险;然而,这一风险并无统计学意义。睡眠剥夺(SD)(OR:6.33,CI:2.2-18.2;P=0.00)、非快速眼动睡眠(NREM)(OR:2.41,CI:1.0-5.4;P=0.00)和延长脑电图记录(OR:1.91,CI:0.9-3.9;P=0.04)导致促发后 EAs 激活和出现具有统计学意义的风险。
不同的诱发方法可以激活和增强具有不同临床意义的各种脑电图模式。检测激活的发作性 EAs 取决于各种患者因素,包括癫痫发作的控制和应用的诱发方法。需要进一步进行更大规模的前瞻性队列研究,样本量足够大。