The clinical utility of ambulatory EEG in childhood. (January 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Nagyova, Rebeka; Horsburgh, Gillian; Robertson, Angela; Zuberi, Sameer M.
• Is Part Of: Seizure. Volume 64(2019)
• Page Start: 45
• Page End: 49
• Publication Date: 2019-01
• Subjects: AEEG ambulatory electroencephalogram -- VT video telemetry -- ESES encephalopathy with status epilepticus during sleep; Electroencephalography -- Child -- Ambulatory EEG -- Epilepsy -- Encephalopathy with status epilepticus during sleep -- Clinical utility; Epilepsy -- Periodicals; Epilepsy -- Periodicals; Seizures -- Periodicals; Épilepsie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; Electronic journals; 616.853
• DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2018.11.020
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1059-1311

Abstract

Highlights: In 199 consecutive tests ambulatory EEG (AEEG) had clinical utility in 65%. In this series 49% of tests were done for other reasons than to capture events. For encephalopathy with status epilepticus during sleep the utility is almost 100%. 24 h AEEG performed to capture events was useful in 43%. Technical issues affecting the conclusion occurred in only 7/199 (3.5%) studies. Abstract: Purpose: To evaluate the clinical utility of the ambulatory electroencephalogram (AEEG) in children. Method: Data from 199 consecutive referrals for a paediatric AEEG were reviewed retrospectively. Information was gathered on various aspects of the referral process, the characteristics of the children referred and the reasons for referral. Clinical utility was calculated as the percentage of cases in which the investigation provided useful information with respect to the question asked of the test. Results: The AEEG was useful in 64.8% cases overall. In 51.4% of cases the reason for referral was to capture events, however the test was only useful in 42.6% of these. The most common reason for an unsuccessful investigation was failure to capture events (55.6%). Suspected encephalopathy with status epilepticus during sleep (ESES) was the indication in a substantial number of cases (38.6%), and the investigation was useful in most of these (97.5%). Technical issues were only responsible for 7 (9.7%) of unsuccessful studies. Conclusion: The paediatric AEEG was useful in two thirds of patients. Failure to capture events appears to be the most significant limiting factor. The AEEG is very useful in investigating suspected ESES.