4.5 Article

Interictal spikes on intracranial recording: Behavior, physiology, and implications

期刊

EPILEPSIA
卷 49, 期 11, 页码 1881-1892

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2008.01641.x

关键词

Interictal spikes; EEG monitoring; Uncontrolled epilepsy; Intracranial EEG

资金

  1. NIH [R01NSO44102]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The physiological, pathological, and clinical meaning of interictal spikes (IISs) remains controversial. We systematically analyzed the frequency, occurrence, and distribution of IISs recorded from multiple intracranial electrodes in 34 refractory epileptic patients with respect to seizures and antiepileptic drug (AED) changes. Continuous spike counts from all recorded contacts of all implanted electrodes, and also separately for the subset of contacts involved at seizure onset, were tabulated for every hour of every day of recording, and expressed as spikes per hour in six preselected, 24-h intervals (defined to exclude seizures): (1) on medications; (2) prepreseizure; (3) preseizure; (4) postseizure; (5) off meds; and (6) resumed meds. Mean spike rates were analyzed for differences between designated 24-h intervals. Spike rate in all recorded contacts consistently and significantly decreased after AED withdrawal, despite variability in initial spike rate, diurnal occurrence, seizure character/number/localization of onset, and type(s) of AED continued or withdrawn (p < 0.0001). A significant increase in spike rate was noted in the 24 h after seizures of medial temporal origin, in the medial temporal lobe contacts; neocortical onset seizures did not show any increase. These observations confirm and extend previous reports, suggesting a general effect of AED withdrawal, and a more specific effect of medial temporal lobe seizures, on IIS rate. AED mechanisms and efficacy might be demonstrated by quantifying IIS with changes in AEDs. Furthermore, variability in IIS rate after seizures distinguishes localization of seizure onset in medial temporal versus neocortical locations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据