Distinction between epileptic and non-epileptic arousal by heart rate change.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the difference in heart rate (HR) change between epileptic and non-epileptic arousals in adult patients with epilepsy (PWE). METHODS: This is a case-control study conducted at the University Hospitals of Cleveland Medical Center. Inclusion criteria are (1) adult (≥18 years old) PWE who had arousal related to a focal aware or impaired awareness automatism seizure with or without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizure during an Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) admission between January 2009 and January 2021 or (2) adult PWE who had a non-epileptic arousal during an EMU admission between July 2020 and January 2021. Outcomes are (1) a percent change in baseline HR within 60 s after arousal and (2) the highest percent change in baseline HR within a 10-s sliding time window within 60 s after arousal. RESULTS: We included 20 non-epileptic arousals from 20 adult PWE and 29 epileptic arousals with seizures from 29 adult PWE. Within 60 s after arousal, HR increased by a median of 86.7% (interquartile range (IQR), 52.7%-121.3%) in the epileptic arousal group compared to a median of 26.1% (12.9%-43.3%) in the non-epileptic arousal group (p < 0.001). The cut-off value was 48.7%. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were 0.85, 0.79, and 0.80, respectively. More than 70.1% was only in the epileptic arousals, with 100% specificity. Within 10 s of the greatest change, HR increased by 36.5 (18.7%-48.4%) in the epileptic arousal group compared to 17.7 (10.9%-23.7%) in the non-epileptic arousal group (p < 0.001). The cut-off value was 36.5%. The AUC, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.79, 0.52, and 0.95, respectively. More than 48.1% was only in the epileptic arousals, with 100% specificity. SIGNIFICANCE: Tachycardia during epileptic arousals was significantly higher and more robust compared to tachycardia during non-epileptic arousals.

Infant with Loeys-Dietz syndrome treated for febrile status epilepticus with COVID-19 infection: first reported case of febrile status epilepticus and focal seizures in a patient with Loeys-Dietz syndrome and review of literature.

Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS) is a rare, autosomal dominant multisystem disorder that is caused by mutations of transforming growth factor-ß receptors. Mutations in SMAD3 and TGFB3 have been recently reported.LDS is characterised by the triad of arterial tortuosity, hypertelorism and a bifid uvula or cleft palate among other cardiovascular, craniofacial and orthopaedic manifestations. Patients with LDS show clinical and genetic variability and there is a significant risk of reduced life expectancy due to widespread arterial involvement, aortic root dilation, aneurysms and an aggressive vascular course. Thus early genetic testing is warranted if clinical signs and history are suggestive of this potentially catastrophic disorder.LDS predisposes patients to aortic aneurysms and early death due to vascular malformations, but neurological emergencies, such as seizures and febrile status epilepticus, have not been reported.Febrile status epilepticus is the most common neurological emergency in childhood. Neurological manifestations of COVID-19 in the paediatric population are not as well described in medical literature.To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case of febrile status epilepticus with COVID-19 infection in an infant with LDS. Our patient had focal epileptiform activity emanating over the left posterior hemisphere, which evolved into an electrographic seizure on video EEG. Such patients have a heightened risk of epilepsy in the future, and this occurrence is consistent with a diagnosis of focal epilepsy. Neurological complications such as epilepsy and status epilepticus in a patient with LDS have never been reported before.A brief review of literature is also given here.

Electroencephalographic biomarkers of epilepsy development in patients with acute brain injury: a matched, parallel cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to investigate if highly epileptic electroencephalogram (EEG) findings in patients with acute brain injury increase the long-term risk of epilepsy development. METHODS: Adults patients, lacking epilepsy history, with electrographic seizures or lateralized periodic discharges (LPDs) (cases) were identified and matched based on age, mental status, and etiology with the ones lacking any epileptiform activity (controls) on continuous EEG (cEEG) during hospitalization. The primary outcome of clinical seizures after hospital discharge and their antiepileptic drug (AED) status was determined using a telephonic interview. Logistic regression models using generalized estimating equations to account for the matched nature of the data were performed. RESULTS: A total of 70 cases [16 (22.9%) "LPDs only," 34 (48.6%) "electrographic seizure only," and 20 (28.6%) "both"] and controls were enrolled. A total of 22 (31.4%) cases developed epilepsy after a mean follow-up duration of 20.6 ± 5.0 months compared to three (4.3%) controls. After adjusting for cEEG indication and follow-up duration, the odds of cases developing epilepsy were almost 15 times higher compared to the controls (OR = 14.8, 95% CI = 2.4-92.3, P = 0.004). This elevated risk was despite a 10 times higher likelihood of cases to be taking AEDs at the last follow-up (OR = 10.34, 95% CI = 3.7-29, P < 0.001). INTERPRETATION: Highly epileptic EEG findings in patients with acute brain injury may serve as prognostic biomarkers of epilepsy development. Although prospective studies are required to confirm our findings, it seems that with epilepsy developing in almost one-third cases in less than 2-year follow-up period, such patients may potentially be ideal candidates for epilepsy prevention clinical trials.

The safety of same-day CT colonography following incomplete colonoscopy with polypectomy.

BACKGROUND: Concerns about the risk of bowel perforation for same-day computed tomography colonography (CTC) following an incomplete colonoscopy with polypectomy may lead to unnecessarily postponing the CTC. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to describe the complications including colon perforations associated with same-day CTC in a cohort who had polypectomies but an incomplete colonoscopy. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective study. SETTING: Our study took place in a single, tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: We studied consecutive patients who had CTC the same day as an incomplete colonoscopy with polypectomy. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions included optical colonoscopy (OC), endoscopic polypectomies, and same-day CTC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Our main outcome measurements included perforation rate with long-term follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 3% of patients undergoing colonoscopy from January 2008 to December 2012 had same-day CTC following incomplete OC, and 72 polypectomies were performed in 34 (or 17%) of these patients. Incomplete colonoscopies were due to colon tortuosity and looping (25), severe angulations (five), colon mass (two), colon stenosis (one), bradycardia (one). Fifty-three percent of the OCs were screening for colon neoplasia, 29% diagnostic and 18% were surveillance of colon polyps. Most polyps were ≤ 5 mm, and found in the left colon. There were no reported complications or perforations associated with same-day CTCs during short- and long-term follow-up. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of our analysis included retrospective single-center design, small number of patients for the occurrence, referral to same-day CTC was not standardized, inability to establish safety of CTC for specific scenarios such as after complex polypectomies, strictures, or advanced IBD. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists' apprehension to perform a CTC the same day as an incomplete colonoscopy following polypectomies because of perceived risk of perforation may be unfounded. More data are needed to determine the safety of same-day CTC in patients with high-risk findings during colonoscopy such as a stricture, severe IBD, and after complex polypectomies.