Search

This document is a correction notice for an article published in the Journal of Neurology. It acknowledges an error in the original article where Table 1 was duplicated as Table 2. The correction provides the correct version of Table 2, which presents the results of a study comparing the use of 3T and 7T MRI in various neurological conditions. The study found that 7T MRI generally provided better visibility and delineation of structures compared to 3T MRI, but there were variations in the results depending on the specific condition being studied. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: Recently, the 7 Tesla (7 T) Epilepsy Task Force published recommendations for 7 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with pharmaco-resistant focal epilepsy in pre-surgical evaluation. The objective of this study was to implement and evaluate this consensus protocol with respect to both its practicability and its diagnostic value/potential lesion delineation surplus effect over 3 T MRI in the pre-surgical work-up of patients with pharmaco-resistant focal onset epilepsy. Methods: The 7 T MRI protocol consisted of T1-weighted, T2-weighted, high-resolution-coronal T2-weighted, fluid-suppressed, fluid-and-white-matter-suppressed, and susceptibility-weighted imaging, with an overall duration of 50 min. Two neuroradiologists independently evaluated the ability of lesion identification, the detection confidence for these identified lesions, and the lesion border delineation at 7 T compared to 3 T MRI. Results: Of 41 recruited patients > 12 years of age, 38 were successfully measured and analyzed. Mean detection confidence scores were non-significantly higher at 7 T (1.95 ± 0.84 out of 3 versus 1.64 ± 1.19 out of 3 at 3 T, p = 0.050). In 50% of epilepsy patients measured at 7 T, additional findings compared to 3 T MRI were observed. Furthermore, we found improved border delineation at 7 T in 88% of patients with 3 T-visible lesions. In 19% of 3 T MR-negative cases a new potential epileptogenic lesion was detected at 7 T. Conclusions: The diagnostic yield was beneficial, but with 19% new 7 T over 3 T findings, not major. Our evaluation revealed epilepsy outcomes worse than ILAE Class 1 in two out of the four operated cases with new 7 T findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of seizure burden in patients with super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE) by using quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG). Methods: EEG recordings from 69 patients with SRSE (2009–2019) were reviewed and annotated for seizures by three groups of reviewers: two board-certified neurophysiologists using only raw EEG (gold standard), two neurocritical care providers with substantial experience in qEEG analysis (qEEG experts), and two inexperienced qEEG readers (qEEG novices) using only a qEEG trend panel. Results: Raw EEG experts identified 35 (51%) patients with seizures, accounting for 2950 seizures (3,126 min). qEEG experts had a sensitivity of 93%, a specificity of 61%, a false positive rate of 6.5 per day, and good agreement (κ = 0.64) between both qEEG experts. qEEG novices had a sensitivity of 98.5%, a specificity of 13%, a false positive rate of 15 per day, and fair agreement (κ = 0.4) between both qEEG novices. Seizure burden was not different between the qEEG experts and the gold standard (3,257 vs. 3,126 min), whereas qEEG novices reported higher burden (6066 vs. 3126 min). Conclusions: Both qEEG experts and novices had a high sensitivity but a low specificity for seizure detection in patients with SRSE. qEEG could be a useful tool for qEEG experts to estimate seizure burden in patients with SRSE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Epileptologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Epileptologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Epileptologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Epileptologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Purpose: To review the epidemiology and pathophysiology of autonomic symptoms and signs during epileptic seizures. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search on the following autonomic symptoms and signs during epileptic seizures: cardiovascular changes, respiratory manifestations, gastrointestinal symptoms, cutaneous manifestations, sexual and genital manifestations, and urinary symptoms. Results: Autonomic symptoms and signs can represent the predominant symptom at the onset of a focal seizure, which would then lead to the seizure being classified as a focal onset autonomic seizure. Conversely, clinically relevant autonomic symptoms and signs frequently accompany seizures of focal, generalized, and/or unknown onset, but the seizure is regardless classified according to other, more relevant features. Autonomic symptoms and signs do not represent mere reactions to motor activity or other behavioral seizure manifestations, but rather they are generated by epileptic discharges affecting the central autonomic network. We have reviewed the localizing and lateralizing information currently available on the seizure onset zone and on seizure propagation pathways as provided by systematic analysis of specific autonomic seizure symptoms and signs. We present data on how autonomic seizure symptoms and signs are useful for gaining a better understanding of the anatomical and functional organization of the central autonomic network. Finally, we discuss the differential diagnosis of focal autonomic seizures with autonomic symptoms and signs representing the sole seizure manifestation versus various non-epileptic conditions. Conclusions: Autonomic seizure symptoms and signs are relevant in clinical epileptology and open a unique window on the functional organization and pathophysiology of the central autonomic network. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Critical care continuous electroencephalography (CCEEG) represents the gold standard for detection of nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) in neurological critical care patients. It is unclear which findings on short-term routine EEG and which clinical parameters predict NCSE during subsequent CCEEG reliably. The aim of the present study was to assess the prognostic significance of changes within the first 30 min of EEG as well as of clinical parameters for the occurrence of NCSE during subsequent CCEEG.Methods: Systematic analysis of the first 30 min and the remaining segments of prospective CCEEG recordings according to the ACNS Standardized Critical Care EEG Terminology and according to recently proposed NCSE criteria as well as review of clinical parameters of 85 consecutive neurological critical care patients. Logistic regression and binary classification tests were used to determine the most useful parameters within the first 30 min of EEG predicting subsequent NCSE.Results: The presence of early sporadic epileptiform discharges (SED) and early rhythmic or periodic EEG patterns of "ictal-interictal uncertainty" (RPPIIIU) (OR 15.51, 95% CI 2.83-84.84, p = 0.002) and clinical signs of NCS (OR 18.43, 95% CI 2.06-164.62, p = 0.009) predicted NCSE on subsequent CCEEG. Various combinations of early SED, early RPPIIIU, and clinical signs of NCS showed sensitivities of 79-100%, specificities of 49-89%, and negative predictive values of 95-100% regarding the incidence of subsequent NCSE (p < 0.001).Conclusions: Early SED and early RPPIIIU within the first 30 min of EEG as well as clinical signs of NCS predict the occurrence of NCSE during subsequent CCEEG with high sensitivity and high negative predictive value and may be useful to select patients who should undergo CCEEG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]