Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
[Safety study of long-term video-electroencephalogram monitoring]. / Estudio de seguridad en la monitorización por vídeo-electroencefalograma prolongado.
Ley, M; Vivanco, R; Massot, A; Jiménez, J; Roquer, J; Rocamora, R.
Affiliation
  • Ley M; Unidad de Monitorización de Epilepsia, Servicio de Neurología, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, España. Electronic address: 99151@parcdesalutmar.cat.
  • Vivanco R; Unidad de Monitorización de Epilepsia, Servicio de Neurología, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, España.
  • Massot A; Unidad de Monitorización de Epilepsia, Servicio de Neurología, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, España.
  • Jiménez J; Unidad de Monitorización de Epilepsia, Servicio de Neurología, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, España.
  • Roquer J; Unidad de Monitorización de Epilepsia, Servicio de Neurología, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, España.
  • Rocamora R; Unidad de Monitorización de Epilepsia, Servicio de Neurología, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, España.
Neurologia ; 29(1): 21-6, 2014.
Article in Es | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23830576
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

The increased morbidity and mortality and poorer quality of life associated with drug-resistant epilepsy justify admitting patients to epilepsy monitoring units (EMU). These units employ methods that promote the occurrence of seizures, which involves a risk of secondary adverse events. The aim of our study is to characterise and quantify these adverse events in a Spanish EMU. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

A descriptive, longitudinal and retrospective study of patients admitted consecutively to our EMU. Patients admitted due to status epilepticus, clusters of seizures, or as participants in a clinical trial were excluded.

RESULTS:

We included 175 patients, of whom 92.1% (161) did not suffer any adverse events. Status epilepticus was present in 3.4% (6); 1.7% (3) had traumatic injury, 1.7% (3) had interictal or postictal psychosis, and 1.1% (2) had cardiorespiratory impairment. There were no risk factors associated with these adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS:

The most frequently-identified adverse events were status epilepticus, traumatic injury, interictal or postictal psychosis, and cardiorespiratory disorders. The frequency of these adverse events was similar to that seen in international literature. The complications detected do not contraindicate VEEGM.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Electroencephalography / Epilepsy Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Adolescent / Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Child / Child, preschool / Female / Humans / Infant / Male Language: Es Journal: Neurologia Journal subject: NEUROLOGIA Year: 2014 Document type: Article Publication country: ES / ESPANHA / ESPAÑA / SPAIN

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Electroencephalography / Epilepsy Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Adolescent / Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Child / Child, preschool / Female / Humans / Infant / Male Language: Es Journal: Neurologia Journal subject: NEUROLOGIA Year: 2014 Document type: Article Publication country: ES / ESPANHA / ESPAÑA / SPAIN