重症监护病房的连续脑电图与常规脑电图:当前证据的回顾。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
European Neurology Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-10 DOI:10.1159/000535085
Helene Fenter, Andrea O Rossetti, Isabelle Beuchat
{"title":"重症监护病房的连续脑电图与常规脑电图:当前证据的回顾。","authors":"Helene Fenter, Andrea O Rossetti, Isabelle Beuchat","doi":"10.1159/000535085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Electroencephalography (EEG) has long been used to detect seizures in patients with disorders of consciousness. In recent years, there has been a drastically increased adoption of continuous EEG (cEEG) in the intensive care units (ICUs). Given the resources necessary to record and interpret cEEG, this is still not available in every center and widespread recommendations to use continuous instead of routine EEG (typically lasting 20 min) are still a matter of some debate. Considering recent literature and personal experience, this review offers a rationale and practical advice to address this question.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Despite the development of increasingly performant imaging techniques and several validated biomarkers, EEG remains central to clinicians in the intensive care unit and has been experiencing expanding popularity for at least 2 decades. Not only does EEG allow seizure or status epilepticus detection, which in the ICU often present without clinical movements, but it is also paramount for the prognostic evaluation of comatose patients, especially after cardiac arrest, and for detecting delayed ischemia after subarachnoid hemorrhage. At the end of the last Century, improvements of technical and digital aspects regarding recording and storage of EEG tracings have progressively led to the era of cEEG and automated quantitative analysis.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>As compared to repeated rEEG, cEEG in comatose patients does not seem to improve clinical prognosis to a relevant extent, despite allowing a more performant of detection ictal events and consequent therapeutic modifications. The choice between cEEG and rEEG must therefore always be patient-tailored.</p>","PeriodicalId":12065,"journal":{"name":"European Neurology","volume":" ","pages":"17-25"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11003555/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Continuous versus Routine Electroencephalography in the Intensive Care Unit: A Review of Current Evidence.\",\"authors\":\"Helene Fenter, Andrea O Rossetti, Isabelle Beuchat\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000535085\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Electroencephalography (EEG) has long been used to detect seizures in patients with disorders of consciousness. In recent years, there has been a drastically increased adoption of continuous EEG (cEEG) in the intensive care units (ICUs). Given the resources necessary to record and interpret cEEG, this is still not available in every center and widespread recommendations to use continuous instead of routine EEG (typically lasting 20 min) are still a matter of some debate. Considering recent literature and personal experience, this review offers a rationale and practical advice to address this question.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Despite the development of increasingly performant imaging techniques and several validated biomarkers, EEG remains central to clinicians in the intensive care unit and has been experiencing expanding popularity for at least 2 decades. Not only does EEG allow seizure or status epilepticus detection, which in the ICU often present without clinical movements, but it is also paramount for the prognostic evaluation of comatose patients, especially after cardiac arrest, and for detecting delayed ischemia after subarachnoid hemorrhage. At the end of the last Century, improvements of technical and digital aspects regarding recording and storage of EEG tracings have progressively led to the era of cEEG and automated quantitative analysis.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>As compared to repeated rEEG, cEEG in comatose patients does not seem to improve clinical prognosis to a relevant extent, despite allowing a more performant of detection ictal events and consequent therapeutic modifications. The choice between cEEG and rEEG must therefore always be patient-tailored.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Neurology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17-25\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11003555/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000535085\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000535085","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,脑电图一直被用于检测意识障碍患者的癫痫发作。近年来,连续脑电图(cEEG)在icu中的应用急剧增加。尽管越来越高性能的成像技术和一些经过验证的生物标志物的发展,脑电图仍然是临床医生在重症监护病房的中心,并且正在经历扩大适应症。脑电图不仅可以检测癫痫发作或癫痫持续状态,这在ICU中通常没有临床运动,而且对于昏迷患者的预后评估,特别是在心脏骤停后,以及在蛛网膜下腔出血后检测延迟性缺血也是至关重要的。大约二十年前,记录和存储脑电图追踪技术方面的改进导致了连续脑电图(cEEG)和自动定量分析(qEEG)的时代。考虑到记录和解释脑电图所需的资源,这仍然不是在每个中心都可用,并且广泛推荐使用连续脑电图代替常规脑电图(通常持续20分钟)仍然是一个有争议的问题。根据最近的文献和个人经验,这篇综述为解决这个问题提供了一个基本原理。与重复的rEEG相比,昏迷患者的cEEG似乎没有在一定程度上改善临床预后,尽管可以更有效地检测致命事件和随后的治疗修改。因此,在cEEG和rEEG之间的选择必须始终耐心定制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Continuous versus Routine Electroencephalography in the Intensive Care Unit: A Review of Current Evidence.

Background: Electroencephalography (EEG) has long been used to detect seizures in patients with disorders of consciousness. In recent years, there has been a drastically increased adoption of continuous EEG (cEEG) in the intensive care units (ICUs). Given the resources necessary to record and interpret cEEG, this is still not available in every center and widespread recommendations to use continuous instead of routine EEG (typically lasting 20 min) are still a matter of some debate. Considering recent literature and personal experience, this review offers a rationale and practical advice to address this question.

Summary: Despite the development of increasingly performant imaging techniques and several validated biomarkers, EEG remains central to clinicians in the intensive care unit and has been experiencing expanding popularity for at least 2 decades. Not only does EEG allow seizure or status epilepticus detection, which in the ICU often present without clinical movements, but it is also paramount for the prognostic evaluation of comatose patients, especially after cardiac arrest, and for detecting delayed ischemia after subarachnoid hemorrhage. At the end of the last Century, improvements of technical and digital aspects regarding recording and storage of EEG tracings have progressively led to the era of cEEG and automated quantitative analysis.

Key messages: As compared to repeated rEEG, cEEG in comatose patients does not seem to improve clinical prognosis to a relevant extent, despite allowing a more performant of detection ictal events and consequent therapeutic modifications. The choice between cEEG and rEEG must therefore always be patient-tailored.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Neurology
European Neurology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
51
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: ''European Neurology'' publishes original papers, reviews and letters to the editor. Papers presented in this journal cover clinical aspects of diseases of the nervous system and muscles, as well as their neuropathological, biochemical, and electrophysiological basis. New diagnostic probes, pharmacological and surgical treatments are evaluated from clinical evidence and basic investigative studies. The journal also features original works and reviews on the history of neurology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信