Ebersole J S, Leroy R F
Neurology. 1983 Jul;33(7):853-60. doi: 10.1212/wnl.33.7.853.
We assessed the ability to recognize epileptiform abnormalities on a video review of ambulatory cassette EEGs (A/EEG) by comparing two independent interpretations of an A/EEG to those derived from a routine recording and intensive monitoring by cable telemetry (C/EEG) of the same 40 patients. Both A/EEG readings concurred with the C/EEG interpretation as to normality or epileptiform abnormality in 77% of cases. Seventy-nine percent of focal and 100% of generalized interictal abnormalities, as well as all seizures, noted on C/EEG were detected by both A/EEG reviewers. Of patients with normal baseline EEGs, 37% showed epileptiform features on A/EEG versus 44% with C/EEG. Limits to the characterization of abnormalities by A/EEG and a protocol for the video review of A/EEG tapes are discussed. In those specific areas for which intensive surface EEG monitoring is most useful, ambulatory cassette EEG appears to be an acceptable intermediate-level alternative.
我们通过比较40例患者的动态盒式脑电图(A/EEG)的两种独立解读结果与通过有线遥测常规记录和强化监测(C/EEG)得出的结果,评估了在动态盒式脑电图视频回顾中识别癫痫样异常的能力。在77%的病例中,A/EEG的两种读数在正常或癫痫样异常方面与C/EEG的解读结果一致。两位A/EEG阅片者均检测到C/EEG上记录的79%的局灶性和100%的广泛性发作间期异常以及所有发作。在基线脑电图正常的患者中,37%在A/EEG上显示癫痫样特征,而在C/EEG上为44%。讨论了A/EEG对异常特征描述的局限性以及A/EEG磁带视频回顾的方案。在那些强化头皮脑电图监测最有用的特定领域,动态盒式脑电图似乎是一种可接受的中级替代方法。