Korwyn Williams

Electrographic seizures in pediatric ICU patients Cohort study of risk factors and mortality

Objectives: We aimed to determine the incidence of electrographic seizures in children in the pediatric intensive care unit who underwent EEG monitoring, risk factors for electrographic seizures, and whether electrographic seizures were associated with increased odds of mortality. Methods: Eleven sites in North America retrospectively reviewed a total of 550 consecutive children in pediatric intensive care units who underwent EEG monitoring. We collected data on demographics, diagnoses, clinical seizures, mental status at EEG onset, EEG background, interictal epileptiform discharges, electrographic seizures, intensive care unit length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. Results: Electrographic seizures occurred in 162 of 550 subjects (30%), of which 61 subjects (38%) had electrographic status epilepticus. Electrographic seizures were exclusively subclinical in 59 of 162 subjects (36%). A multivariable logistic regression model showed that independent risk factors for electrographic seizures included younger age, clinical seizures prior to EEG monitoring, an abnormal initial EEG background, interictal epileptiform discharges, and a diagnosis of epilepsy. Subjects with electrographic status epilepticus had greater odds of in-hospital death, even after adjusting for EEG background and neurologic diagnosis category. Conclusions: Electrographic seizures are common among children in the pediatric intensive care unit, particularly those with specific risk factors. Electrographic status epilepticus occurs in more than one-third of children with electrographic seizures and is associated with higher in-hospital mortality.

Continuous video‐EEG monitoring in pediatric intensive care units

Purpose:  Several studies indicate a higher occurrence than might be expected of seizures in intensive care unit patients, many of which are not clinically apparent. Few of these studies are devoted exclusively to pediatric patients. The purpose of this study is to determine the occurrence of seizures in a cohort of pediatric and neonatal intensive care unit patients.

Gaps and opportunities in refractory status epilepticus research in children: A multi-center approach by the Pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group (pSERG)

Purpose: Status epilepticus (SE) is a life-threatening condition that can be refractory to initial treatment. Randomized controlled studies to guide treatment choices, especially beyond first-line drugs, are not available. This report summarizes the evidence that guides the management of refractory convulsive SE (RCSE) in children, defines gaps in our clinical knowledge and describes the development and works of the ‘pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group’ (pSERG). Methods: A literature review was performed to evaluate current gaps in the pediatric SE and RCSE literature. In person and online meetings helped to develop and expand the pSERG network. Results: The care of pediatric RCSE is largely based on extrapolations of limited evidence derived from adult literature and supplemented with case reports and case series in children. No comparative effectiveness trials have been performed in the pediatric population. Gaps in knowledge include risk factors for SE, biomarkers of SE and RCSE, second-and third-line treatment options, and long-term outcome. Conclusion: The care of children with RCSE is based on limited evidence. In order to address these knowledge gaps, the multicenter pSERG was established to facilitate prospective collection, analysis, and sharing of de-identified data and biological specimens from children with RCSE. These data will allow identification of treatment strategies associated with better outcomes and delineate evidence-based interventions to improve the care of children with SE.

Electrographic seizures after convulsive status epilepticus in children and young adults: a retrospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE To describe the prevalence, characteristics, and predictors of electrographic seizures after convulsive status epilepticus (CSE). STUDY DESIGN This was a multicenter retrospective study in which we describe clinical and electroencephalographic (EEG) features of children (1 month to 21 years) with CSE who underwent continuous EEG monitoring. RESULTS Ninety-eight children (53 males) with CSE (median age of 5 years) underwent subsequent continuous EEG monitoring after CSE. Electrographic seizures (with or without clinical correlate) were identified in 32 subjects (33%). Eleven subjects (34.4%) had electrographic-only seizures, 17 subjects (53.1%) had electroclinical seizures, and 4 subjects (12.5%) had an unknown clinical correlate. Of the 32 subjects with electrographic seizures, 15 subjects (46.9%) had electrographic status epilepticus. Factors associated with the occurrence of electrographic seizures after CSE were a previous diagnosis of epilepsy (P = .029) and the presence of interictal epileptiform discharges (P < .0005). The median (p25-p75) duration of stay in the pediatric intensive care unit was longer for children with electrographic seizures than for children without electrographic seizures (9.5 [3-22.5] vs 2 [2-5] days, Wilcoxon test, Z = 3.916, P = .0001). Four children (4.1%) died before leaving the hospital, and we could not identify a relationship between death and the presence or absence of electrographic seizures. CONCLUSIONS After CSE, one-third of children who underwent EEG monitoring experienced electrographic seizures, and among these, one-third experienced entirely electrographic-only seizures. A previous diagnosis of epilepsy and the presence of interictal epileptiform discharges were risk factors for electrographic seizures.

Electroencephalography monitoring in critically ill children: Current practice and implications for future study design

Survey data indicate that continuous electroencephalography (EEG) (CEEG) monitoring is used with increasing frequency to identify electrographic seizures in critically ill children, but studies of current CEEG practice have not been conducted. We aimed to describe the clinical utilization of CEEG in critically ill children at tertiary care hospitals with a particular focus on variables essential for designing feasible prospective multicenter studies evaluating the impact of electrographic seizures on outcome.

Sensitivity of quantitative EEG for seizure identification in the intensive care unit

Objective: To evaluate the sensitivity of quantitative EEG (QEEG) for electrographic seizure identification in the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: Six-hour EEG epochs chosen from 15 patients underwent transformation into QEEG displays. Each epoch was reviewed in 3 formats: raw EEG, QEEG + raw, and QEEG-only. Epochs were also analyzed by a proprietary seizure detection algorithm. Nine neurophysiologists reviewed raw EEGs to identify seizures to serve as the gold standard. Nine other neurophysiologists with experience in QEEG evaluated the epochs in QEEG formats, with and without concomitant raw EEG. Sensitivity and false-positive rates (FPRs) for seizure identification were calculated and median review time assessed. Results: Mean sensitivity for seizure identification ranged from 51% to 67% for QEEG-only and 63%–68% for QEEG + raw. FPRs averaged 1/h for QEEG-only and 0.5/h for QEEG + raw. Mean sensitivity of seizure probability software was 26.2%–26.7%, with FPR of 0.07/h. Epochs with the highest sensitivities contained frequent, intermittent seizures. Lower sensitivities were seen with slow-frequency, low-amplitude seizures and epochs with rhythmic or periodic patterns. Median review times were shorter for QEEG (6 minutes) and QEEG + raw analysis (14.5 minutes) vs raw EEG (19 minutes; p = 0.00003). Conclusions: A panel of QEEG trends can be used by experts to shorten EEG review time for seizure identification with reasonable sensitivity and low FPRs. The prevalence of false detections confirms that raw EEG review must be used in conjunction with QEEG. Studies are needed to identify optimal QEEG trend configurations and the utility of QEEG as a screening tool for non-EEG personnel. Classification of evidence review: This study provides Class II evidence that QEEG + raw interpreted by experts identifies seizures in patients in the ICU with a sensitivity of 63%–68% and FPR of 0.5 seizures per hour.

Development and validation of a seizure prediction model in critically ill children

PURPOSE Electrographic seizures are common in encephalopathic critically ill children, but identification requires continuous EEG monitoring (CEEG). Development of a seizure prediction model would enable more efficient use of limited CEEG resources. We aimed to develop and validate a seizure prediction model for use among encephalopathic critically ill children. METHOD We developed a seizure prediction model using a retrospectively acquired multi-center database of children with acute encephalopathy without an epilepsy diagnosis, who underwent clinically indicated CEEG. We performed model validation using a separate prospectively acquired single center database. Predictor variables were chosen to be readily available to clinicians prior to the onset of CEEG and included: age, etiology category, clinical seizures prior to CEEG, initial EEG background category, and inter-ictal discharge category. RESULTS The model has fair to good discrimination ability and overall performance. At the optimal cut-off point in the validation dataset, the model has a sensitivity of 59% and a specificity of 81%. Varied cut-off points could be chosen to optimize sensitivity or specificity depending on available CEEG resources. CONCLUSION Despite inherent variability between centers, a model developed using multi-center CEEG data and few readily available variables could guide the use of limited CEEG resources when applied at a single center. Depending on CEEG resources, centers could choose lower cut-off points to maximize identification of all patients with seizures (but with more patients monitored) or higher cut-off points to reduce resource utilization by reducing monitoring of lower risk patients (but with failure to identify some patients with seizures).

Association of Time to Treatment With Short-term Outcomes for Pediatric Patients With Refractory Convulsive Status Epilepticus.

Importance Treatment delay for seizures can lead to longer seizure duration. Whether treatment delay is associated with major adverse outcomes, such as death, remains unknown. Objective To evaluate whether untimely first-line benzodiazepine treatment is associated with unfavorable short-term outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants This multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study included 218 pediatric patients admitted between June 1, 2011, and July 7, 2016, into the 11 tertiary hospitals in the United States within the Pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group. Patients, ranging in age from 1 month to 21 years, with refractory convulsive status epilepticus (RCSE) that did not stop after the administration of at least 2 antiseizure medications were included. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: those who received the first-line benzodiazepine treatment in less than 10 minutes and those who received it 10 or more minutes after seizure onset (untimely). Data were collected and analyzed from June 1, 2011, to July 7, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was death during the related hospital admission. The secondary outcome was the need for continuous infusion for seizure termination. Multivariate analysis of mortality controlled for structural cause, febrile RCSE, age, and previous neurological history (including previous RCSE events). Use of continuous infusions was additionally adjusted for generalized RCSE, continuous RCSE, and 5 or more administrations of antiseizure medication. Results A total of 218 patients were included, among whom 116 (53.2%) were male and the median (interquartile range) age was 4.0 (1.2-9.6) years. The RCSE started in the prehospital setting for 139 patients (63.8%). Seventy-four patients (33.9%) received their first-line benzodiazepine treatment in less than 10 minutes, and 144 (66.1%) received untimely first-line benzodiazepine treatment. Multivariate analysis showed that patients who received untimely first-line benzodiazepine treatment had higher odds of death (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 11.0; 95% CI, 1.43 to ∞; P = .02), had greater odds of receiving continuous infusion (AOR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.01-3.36; P = .047), had longer convulsive seizure duration (AOR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.38-4.88; P = .003), and had more frequent hypotension (AOR 2.3; 95% CI, 1.16-4.63; P = .02). In addition, the timing of the first-line benzodiazepine treatment was correlated with the timing of the second-line (95% CI, 0.64-0.95; P < .001) and third-line antiseizure medications (95% CI, 0.25-0.78; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance Among pediatric patients with RCSE, an untimely first-line benzodiazepine treatment is independently associated with a higher frequency of death, use of continuous infusions, longer convulsion duration, and more frequent hypotension. Results of this study raise the question as to whether poor outcomes could, in part, be prevented by earlier administration of treatment.

Refractory Status Epilepticus in Children: Intention to Treat With Continuous Infusions of Midazolam and Pentobarbital.

Objective: To describe pediatric patients with convulsive refractory status epilepticus in whom there is intention to use an IV anesthetic for seizure control. Design: Two-year prospective observational study evaluating patients (age range, 1 mo to 21 yr) with refractory status epilepticus not responding to two antiepileptic drug classes and treated with continuous infusion of anesthetic agent. Setting: Nine pediatric hospitals in the United States. Patients: In a cohort of 111 patients with refractory status epilepticus (median age, 3.7 yr; 50% male), 54 (49%) underwent continuous infusion of anesthetic treatment. Main Results: The median (interquartile range) ICU length of stay was 10 (3–20) days. Up to four “cycles” of serial anesthetic therapy were used, and seizure termination was achieved in 94% by the second cycle. Seizure duration in controlled patients was 5.9 (1.9–34) hours for the first cycle and longer when a second cycle was required (30 [4–120] hr; p = 0.048). Midazolam was the most frequent first-line anesthetic agent (78%); pentobarbital was the most frequently used second-line agent after midazolam failure (82%). An electroencephalographic endpoint was used in over half of the patients; higher midazolam dosing was used with a burst suppression endpoint. In midazolam nonresponders, transition to a second agent occurred after a median of 1 day. Most patients (94%) experienced seizure termination with these two therapies. Conclusions: Midazolam and pentobarbital remain the mainstay of continuous infusion therapy for refractory status epilepticus in the pediatric patient. The majority of patients experience seizure termination within a median of 30 hours. These data have implications for the design and feasibility of future intervention trials. That is, testing a new anesthetic anticonvulsant after failure of both midazolam and pentobarbital is unlikely to be feasible in a pediatric study, whereas a decision to test an alternative to pentobarbital, after midazolam failure, may be possible in a multicenter multinational study.

Refractory status epilepticus in children with and without prior epilepsy or status epilepticus

Objective: To compare refractory convulsive status epilepticus (rSE) management and outcome in children with and without a prior diagnosis of epilepsy and with and without a history of status epilepticus (SE). Methods: This was a prospective observational descriptive study performed from June 2011 to May 2016 on pediatric patients (1 month–21 years of age) with rSE. Results: We enrolled 189 participants (53% male) with a median (25th–75th percentile) age of 4.2 (1.3–9.6) years. Eighty-nine (47%) patients had a prior diagnosis of epilepsy. Thirty-four (18%) patients had a history of SE. The time to the first benzodiazepine was similar in participants with and without a diagnosis of epilepsy (15 [5–60] vs 16.5 [5–42.75] minutes, p = 0.858). Patients with a diagnosis of epilepsy received their first non-benzodiazepine (BZD) antiepileptic drug (AED) later (93 [46–190] vs 50.5 [28–116] minutes, p = 0.002) and were less likely to receive at least one continuous infusion (35/89 [39.3%] vs 57/100 [57%], p = 0.03). Compared to patients with no history of SE, patients with a history of SE received their first BZD earlier (8 [3.5–22.3] vs 20 [5–60] minutes, p = 0.0073), although they had a similar time to first non-BZD AED (76.5 [45.3–124] vs 65 [32.5–156] minutes, p = 0.749). Differences were mostly driven by the patients with an out-of-hospital rSE onset. Conclusions: Our study establishes that children with rSE do not receive more timely treatment if they have a prior diagnosis of epilepsy; however, a history of SE is associated with more timely administration of abortive medication.