nance imaging (MRI) of the brain, 5,6 emphasizing the importance of access to and quality of additional testing. This review will focus on the evaluation of new-onset seizure in adults and adolescents, which includes history and physical examination, the differential diagnosis, characteristic features of each etiology, and features of a rational diagnostic workup. The choice of treatment includes discussion of the consideration of efficacy, adverse effects, dosing, and patient counseling. MethodsThe literature published through November 2016 was reviewed by searching PubMed. The following keywords were used: epilepsy, first time seizure, unprovoked seizures, first time unprovoked seizure, acute symptomaticseizure,antiepileptictreatment,seizureepidemiology,epilepsy epidemiology, women with epilepsy, epilepsy in the elderly, sudden unexplained death in epilepsy, and refractory epilepsy. No language restriction was applied. Review articles, primary literature, and meta-analysis were included in this review. Articles were reviewed if they were published between 1976 and 2016. Articles were rated using IMPORTANCE Approximately 8% to 10% of the population will experience a seizure during their lifetime. Only about 2% to 3% of patients go on to develop epilepsy. Understanding the underlying etiology leading to an accurate diagnosis is necessary to ensure appropriate treatment and that patients with low risk for recurrence are not treated unnecessarily.OBSERVATIONS Patients can present with new-onset seizure for a variety of reasons such as acute symptomatic seizures due to acute brain injury or metabolic derangements, or unprovoked seizures that are the initial manifestation of epilepsy. A patient history and physical examination may identify features more consistent with an epileptic event and laboratory studies and brain imaging can identify an acute insult contributing to the presentation. Patients diagnosed with first-time unprovoked seizure require electroencephalography and epilepsy protocol-specific magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, which includes thin-cut coronal slices to determine risk of recurrence and the need for long-term treatment. In patients who meet the criteria for diagnosis of epilepsy, a carefully selected antiepileptic medication with consideration of comorbidities, adverse effect profile, and type of epilepsy is essential along with appropriate counseling.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Approximately 3% of the population will develop epilepsy but 2 to 3 times as many patients will experience a single seizure or seizure-like event. A diagnosis of epilepsy has significant medical, social, and emotional consequences. A careful patient history and physical examination, electroencephalography, and brain imaging are necessary to separate patients with acute symptomatic seizures, single unprovoked seizures, and nonepileptic events from those with new-onset epilepsy.

Although there is general agreement regarding the indications for ICU cEEG, there is substantial interinstitutional variability in how the procedure is performed.

Purpose The rapid expansion of the use of continuous critical care electroencephalogram (cEEG) monitoring and resulting multicenter research studies through the Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium has created the need for a collaborative data sharing mechanism and repository. The authors describe the development of a research database incorporating the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society standardized terminology for critical care EEG monitoring. The database includes flexible report generation tools that allow for daily clinical use. Methods Key clinical and research variables were incorporated into a Microsoft Access database. To assess its utility for multicenter research data collection, the authors performed a 21-center feasibility study in which each center entered data from 12 consecutive intensive care unit monitoring patients. To assess its utility as a clinical report generating tool, three large volume centers used it to generate daily clinical critical care EEG reports. Results A total of 280 subjects were enrolled in the multicenter feasibility study. The duration of recording (median, 25.5 hours) varied significantly between the centers. The incidence of seizure (17.6%), periodic/rhythmic discharges (35.7%), and interictal epileptiform discharges (11.8%) was similar to previous studies. The database was used as a clinical reporting tool by 3 centers that entered a total of 3,144 unique patients covering 6,665 recording days. Conclusions The Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium database has been successfully developed and implemented with a dual role as a collaborative research platform and a clinical reporting tool. It is now available for public download to be used as a clinical data repository and report generating tool.

Contraceptive counseling by epileptologists and specific mention of an IUD is significantly associated with patient selection of an IUD as a contraceptive method. This suggests that neurologists can play an important role in patients' contraceptive choices.

Objective: We conducted clinical testing of an automated Bayesian machine learning algorithm (Epilepsy Seizure Assessment Tool [EpiSAT]) for outpatient seizure risk assessment using seizure counting data, and validated performance against specialized epilepsy clinician experts. Methods: We conducted a prospective longitudinal study of EpiSAT performance against 24 specialized clinician experts at three tertiary referral epilepsy centers in the United States. Accuracy, interrater reliability, and intra-rater reliability of EpiSAT for correctly identifying changes in seizure risk (improvements, worsening, or no change) were evaluated using 120 seizures from four synthetic seizure diaries (seizure risk known) and 120 seizures from four real seizure diaries (seizure risk unknown). The proportion of observed agreement between EpiSAT and clinicians was evaluated to assess compatibility of EpiSAT with clinical decision patterns by epilepsy experts. Results: EpiSAT exhibited substantial observed agreement (75.4%) with clinicians for assessing seizure risk. The mean accuracy of epilepsy providers for correctly assessing seizure risk was 74.7%. EpiSAT accurately identified seizure risk in 87.5% of seizure diary entries, corresponding to a significant improvement of 17.4% (P = .002). Clinicians exhibited low-to-moderate interrater reliability for seizure risk assessment (Krippendorff's α = 0.46) with good intrarater reliability across a 4-to 12-week evaluation period (Scott's π = 0.89). Significance: These results validate the ability of EpiSAT to yield objective clinical recommendations on seizure risk which follow decision patterns similar to those from specialized epilepsy providers, but with improved accuracy and reproducibility. This algorithm may serve as a useful clinical decision support system for quantitative analysis of clinical seizure frequency in clinical epilepsy practice.

Objective:To better understand the EEG education provided to adult neurology residents by surveying program directors (PDs) of adult neurology residency programs in the US.Methods:An online survey focused on characteristics of neurology residency programs and their EEG teaching systems was distributed to the 161 adult neurology residency PDs listed in the ACGME website at the time of the study.Results:Forty-seven (29%) out of the 161 PDs completed the survey – most of the participating programs (89%) were academic. The mean number of 1-month EEG rotation(s) required to graduate was 1.7 (range 0-4, median 1.75). EEG rotations involved the inpatient and outpatient setting in 91% and 70% of programs, respectively. The average number of EEGs read during a typical EEG rotation varied from more than 40, in about one-third of programs, to 0-10, in about 14% of programs. There was significant variability in the requirements for successful completion of EEG rotations, and most PDs (64%) reported not utilizing objective measures to assess EEG milestones. The most commonly used educational methods were didactics throughout the year (95%) and EEG teaching during EEG rotations (93%). The most commonly reported barriers to EEG education were insufficient EEG exposure (32%) and ineffective didactics (11%); possible solutions are summarized in table 1.Conclusion:Our study identified a lack of consistency in teaching and evaluating residents during residency and presented EEG education barriers alongside possible solutions. We encourage PDs across the country to re-evaluate their EEG teaching systems in order to optimize EEG education.

Purpose: Stereotactic EEG (SEEG) is being increasingly used in the intracranial evaluation of refractory epilepsy in the United States. In this study, the authors describe current practice of SEEG among National Association of Epilepsy Centers tertiary referral (level IV) centers.Methods: Using the Survey Monkey platform, a survey was sent to all National Association of Epilepsy Centers level IV center directors.Results: Of 192 centers polled, 104 directors completed the survey (54% response rate). Ninety-two percent currently perform SEEG. Of these, 55% of institutions reported that greater than 75% of their invasive electrode cases used SEEG. Stereotactic EEG was commonly used over subdural electrodes in cases of suspected mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (87%), nonlesional frontal lobe epilepsy (79%), insular epilepsy (100%), and individuals with prior epilepsy surgery (74%). Most centers (72%) used single-lead electrocardiogram monitoring concurrently with SEEG, but less than half used continuous pulse oximetry (47%) and only a few used respiratory belts (3%). Other significant intercenter technical variabilities included electrode nomenclature and choice of reference electrode. Patient care protocols varied among centers in patient-to-nurse ratio and allowed patient activity. Half of all centers had personnel who had prior experience in SEEG (50.5%); 20% of centers had adopted SEEG without any formal training.Conclusions: Stereotactic EEG has become the principal method for intracranial EEG monitoring in the majority of epilepsy surgery centers in the United States. Most report similar indications for use of SEEG, though significant variability exists in the utilization of concurrent cardiopulmonary monitoring as well as several technical and patient care practices. There is significant variability in level of background training in SEEG among practitioners. The study highlights the need for consensus statements and guidelines to benchmark SEEG practice and develop uniform standards in the United States.

No abstract