IMPORTANCESeizure risk stratification is needed to boost inpatient seizure detection and to improve continuous electroencephalogram (cEEG) cost-effectiveness. 2HELPS2B can address this need but requires validation. OBJECTIVE To use an independent cohort to validate the 2HELPS2B score and develop a practical guide for its use. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis multicenter retrospective medical record review analyzed clinical and EEG data from patients 18 years or older with a clinical indication for cEEG and an EEG duration of 12 hours or longer who were receiving consecutive cEEG at 6 centers from January 2012 to January 2019. 2HELPS2B was evaluated with the validation cohort using the mean calibration error (CAL), a measure of the difference between prediction and actual results. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to determine the duration of EEG monitoring to achieve a seizure risk of less than 5% based on the 2HELPS2B score calculated on first-hour (screening) EEG. Participants undergoing elective epilepsy monitoring and those who had experienced cardiac arrest were excluded. No participants who met the inclusion criteria were excluded. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe main outcome was a CAL error of less than 5% in the validation cohort. RESULTSThe study included 2111 participants (median age, 51 years; 1113 men [52.7%]; median EEG duration, 48 hours) and the primary outcome was met with a validation cohort CAL error of 4.0% compared with a CAL of 2.7% in the foundational cohort (P = .13). For the 2HELPS2B score calculated on only the first hour of EEG in those without seizures during that hour, the CAL error remained at less than 5.0% at 4.2% and allowed for stratifying patients into low-(2HELPS2B = 0; <5% risk of seizures), medium-(2HELPS2B = 1; 12% risk of seizures), and high-risk (2HELPS2B, Ն2; risk of seizures, >25%) groups. Each of the categories had an associated minimum recommended duration of EEG monitoring to achieve at least a less than 5% risk of seizures, a 2HELPS2B score of 0 at 1-hour screening EEG, a 2HELPS2B score of 1 at 12 hours, and a 2HELPS2B score of 2 or greater at 24 hours.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this study, 2HELPS2B was validated as a clinical tool to aid in seizure detection, clinical communication, and cEEG use in hospitalized patients. In patients without prior clinical seizures, a screening 1-hour EEG that showed no epileptiform findings was an adequate screen. In patients with any highly epileptiform EEG patterns during the first hour of EEG (ie, a 2HELPS2B score of Ն2), at least 24 hours of recording is recommended.

No abstract

Objectives: Electroencephalography (EEG) is a central part of the medical evaluation for patients with neurological disorders. Training an algorithm to label the EEG normal vs abnormal seems challenging, because of EEG heterogeneity and dependence of contextual factors, including age and sleep stage. Our objectives were to validate prior work on an independent data set suggesting that deep learning methods can discriminate between normal vs abnormal EEGs, to understand whether age and sleep stage information can improve discrimination, and to understand what factors lead to errors. Methods: We train a deep convolutional neural network on a heterogeneous set of 8,522 routine EEGs from the Massachusetts General Hospital. We explore several strategies for optimizing model performance, including accounting for age and sleep stage. Results: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) on an independent test set (n = 851) is 0.917 marginally improved by including age (AUC=0.924), and both age and sleep stages (AUC= 0.925), though not statistically significant. Conclusions: The model architecture generalizes well to an independent dataset. Adding age and sleep stage to the model does not significantly improve performance. Significance: Insights learned from misclassified examples, and minimal improvement by adding sleep stage and age suggest fruitful directions for further research.

This study was undertaken to determine the dose-response relation between epileptiform activity burden and outcomes in acutely ill patients. Methods: A single center retrospective analysis was made of 1,967 neurologic, medical, and surgical patients who underwent >16 hours of continuous electroencephalography (EEG) between 2011 and 2017. We developed an artificial intelligence algorithm to annotate 11.02 terabytes of EEG and quantify epileptiform activity burden within 72 hours of recording. We evaluated burden (1) in the first 24 hours of recording, (2) in the 12-hours epoch with highest burden (peak burden), and (3) cumulatively through the first 72 hours of monitoring. Machine learning was applied to estimate the effect of epileptiform burden on outcome. Outcome measure was discharge modified Rankin Scale, dichotomized as good (0-4) versus poor (5-6). Results: Peak epileptiform burden was independently associated with poor outcomes (p < 0.0001). Other independent associations included age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, seizure on presentation, and diagnosis of hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. Model calibration error was calculated across 3 strata based on the time interval between last EEG measurement (up to 72 hours of monitoring) and discharge: (1) <5 days between last measurement and discharge, 0.0941 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.0706-0.1191); 5 to 10 days between last measurement and discharge, 0.0946 (95% CI = 0.0631-0.1290); >10 days between last measurement and discharge, 0.0998 (95% CI = 0.0698-0.1335). After adjusting for covariates, increase in peak epileptiform activity burden from 0 to 100% increased the probability of poor outcome by 35%. Interpretation: Automated measurement of peak epileptiform activity burden affords a convenient, consistent, and quantifiable target for future multicenter randomized trials investigating whether suppressing epileptiform activity improves outcomes.

Seizures, status epilepticus, and seizure-like rhythmic or periodic activities are common, pathological, harmful states of brain electrical activity seen in the electroencephalogram (EEG) of patients during critical medical illnesses or acute brain injury. Accumulating evidence shows that these states, when prolonged, cause neurological injury. In this study we developed a valid method to automatically discover a small number of homogeneous pattern clusters, to facilitate efficient interactive labelling by EEG experts. 592 time domain and spectral features were extracted from continuous EEG (cEEG) data of 369 ICU (intensive care unit) patients. For each patient, feature dimensionality was reduced using principal component analysis (PCA), retaining 95% of the variance. K-medoids clustering was applied to learn a local dictionary from each patient, consisting of k=100 exemplars/words. Changepoint detection (CPD) was utilized to break each EEG into segments. A bag-of-words (BoW) representation was computed for each segment, specifically, a normalized histogram of the words found within each segment. Segments were further clustered using the BoW histograms by Affinity Propagation (AP) using a χ2 distance to measure similarities between histograms. The resulting 30 50 clusters for each patient were scored by EEG experts through labeling only the cluster medoids. Embedding methods t-SNE (t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding) and PCA were used to provide a 2D representation for visualization and exploration of the data. Our results illustrate that it takes approximately 3 minutes to annotate 24 hours of cEEG by experts, which is at least 60 times faster than unaided manual review.

No abstract

Background-Burst suppression in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients is associated with increased mortality. However, the relative contributions of propofol use and critical illness itself to burst suppression; of burst suppression, propofol, and critical illness to mortality; and whether preventing burst suppression might reduce mortality, have not been quantified.Terms of use and reuse: academic research for non-commercial purposes, see here for full terms. https://www.springer.com/aamterms-v1

No abstract