Video-ambulatory EEG in a secondary care center: A retrospective evaluation of utility in the diagnosis of epileptic and nonepileptic seizures

Video ambulatory EEG: A good alternative to inpatient video telemetry?

“…The present study demonstrates that in three quarters of patient having V-AEEG clinical attacks were captured which compares well with the yield from IPVT. Similar rates of capturing clinical events were reported in two recent retrospective studies [6,7] using V-AEEG although neither of these studies had a comparison group of inpatient investigations. There was no difference between V-AEEG and IPVT in overall diagnostic efficacy with both techniques aiding diagnosis in nearly three quarters of patients.…”

“…Our earlier attempts to obtain video recording with ambulatory EEG [3] by providing standalone camcorders were not successful as half the patients failed to record seizures because either they were too brief or there were difficulties operating the camcorder. Clearly the vastly improved results from using V-AEEG from the present and other studies [6,7] may partly be due to the fact that the general population is much more familiar with the use of video recordings since the ubiquitous use of mobile phones and tablets. The new technique also allows for continuous video recording and thus brief attacks are not missed.…”

“…Lawley et al [7] describes missed attacks in 16% of V-AEEG recordings because patients/carers had difficulty using the camcorders. This is supported by the present study where although there were only missed attacks in 2% of patients from problems operating the equipment, there was potential for loss of diagnostic data in 10% of recordings.…”

Home video telemetry in children: A comparison to inpatient video telemetry

“…Comparison to these prior studies demonstrates similar results to our own. Lawley et al, reported typical events in 63% of HVT studies with an overall diagnostic utility of 67% [9]. The same group also documented an ictal capture rate of 56% in a separate report [10]; however, both their studies comprised a small * Including REM and non-REM sleep disorders, hypnic jerks and behavioural attacks.…”

“…Although the new technique has been assessed with favourable results in groups of adult patients, reported use in children is limited [7][8][9][10]. There are special considerations in investigating epilepsy in children which may cause results to differ in comparison to adults.…”