4.4 Article

A systematic study of stereotypy in epileptic seizures versus psychogenic seizure-like events

Journal

EPILEPSY & BEHAVIOR
Volume 90, Issue -, Pages 172-177

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2018.11.030

Keywords

Epilepsy; Seizures; Differential diagnosis; Psychogenic; Nonepileptic seizures; Video-EEG

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The objective of this study was to quantify the features of stereotypy in epileptic seizures and compare it with that of stereotypy in psychogenic nonepileptic seizure-like events (PNES) confirmed by video-electroencephalography (VEEG) monitoring. Methods: Video-electroencephalography monitoring records of 20 patients with temporal lobe seizures (TLS) and 20 with PNES were retrospectively reviewed (n = 138 seizures,48 TLS and 90 PNES). We analyzed the semiology of 59 behaviors of interest for their presence, duration, sequence, and continuity using quantified measures that were entered into statistical analysis. Results: We identified discontinuity as the parameter that was clearly distinct between PNES and epileptic TLS events: there were significantly more frequent pauses of behavior (i.e., on-off' pattern) in PNES compared with TLS (P = 0.012). The frequency of pauses during an event was diagnostic of PNES events. For instance, the presence of 2 pauses during an episode determines a 69% probability of the seizure being nonepileptic. Moreover, PNES events had significantly greater duration (143 s) than TLS events (68 s) (excluding outliers, P = 0.002) and greater duration variability from one event to another in the same subject (P = 0.005). Significance: Our work provides the first quantified measure of behavioral semiology during epileptic and nonepileptic seizures and offers novel behavioral measures to differentiate them from each other. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available