Using a standalone ear-EEG device for focal-onset seizure detection.

BACKGROUND: Seizure detection is challenging outside the clinical environment due to the lack of comfortable, reliable, and practical long-term neurophysiological monitoring devices. We developed a novel, discreet, unobstructive in-ear sensing system that enables long-term electroencephalography (EEG) recording. This is the first study we are aware of that systematically compares the seizure detection utility of in-ear EEG with that of simultaneously recorded intracranial EEG. In addition, we present a similar comparison between simultaneously recorded in-ear EEG and scalp EEG. METHODS: In this foundational research, we conducted a clinical feasibility study and validated the ability of the ear-EEG system to capture focal-onset seizures against 1255 hrs of simultaneous ear-EEG data along with scalp or intracranial EEG in 20 patients with refractory focal epilepsy (11 with scalp EEG, 8 with intracranial EEG, and 1 with both). RESULTS: In a blinded, independent review of the ear-EEG signals, two epileptologists were able to detect 86.4% of the seizures that were subsequently identified using the clinical gold standard EEG modalities, with a false detection rate of 0.1 per day, well below what has been reported for ambulatory monitoring. The few seizures not detected on the ear-EEG signals emanated from deep within the mesial temporal lobe or extra-temporally and remained very focal, without significant propagation. Following multiple sessions of recording for a median continuous wear time of 13 hrs, patients reported a high degree of tolerance for the device, with only minor adverse events reported by the scalp EEG cohort. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results demonstrate the potential of using ear-EEG to enable routine collection of complementary, prolonged, and remote neurophysiological evidence, which may permit real-time detection of paroxysmal events such as seizures and epileptiform discharges. This study suggests that the ear-EEG device may assist clinicians in making an epilepsy diagnosis, assessing treatment efficacy, and optimizing medication titration.

The effect of responsive neurostimulation (RNS) on neuropsychiatric and psychosocial outcomes in drug-resistant epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of responsive neurostimulation (RNS) on neuropsychiatric and psychosocial outcomes has not been extensively evaluated outside of the original clinical trials and post-approval studies. The goal of this study was to ascertain the potential real-world effects of RNS on cognitive, psychiatric, and quality of life (QOL) outcomes in relation to seizure outcomes by examining 50 patients undergoing RNS implantation for drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all patients treated at our institution with RNS for DRE with at least 12 months of follow-up. In addition to baseline demographic and disease-related characteristics, we collected cognitive (Full-Scale Intelligence Quotient, Verbal Comprehension, and Perceptual Reasoning Index), psychiatric (Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventory Scores), and QOL (QOLIE-31) outcomes at 6 and 12 months after RNS implantation and correlated them with seizure outcomes. RESULTS: Fifty patients (median age 39.5 years, 64% female) were treated with RNS for DRE in our institution from 2005 to 2020. Of the 37 of them who had well-documented pre and post-implantation seizure diaries, the 6-month median seizure frequency reduction was 88%, the response rate (50% or greater seizure frequency reduction) was 78%, and 32% of patients were free of disabling seizures in this timeframe. There was no statistically significant difference at a group level in any of the evaluated cognitive, psychiatric, and QOL outcomes at 6 and 12 months post-implantation compared to the pre-implantation baseline, irrespective of seizure outcomes, although a subset of patients experienced a decline in mood or cognitive variables. SIGNIFICANCE: Responsive neurostimulation does not appear to have a statistically significant negative or positive impact on neuropsychiatric and psychosocial status at the group level. We observed significant variability in outcome, with a minority of patients experiencing worse behavioral outcomes, which seemed related to RNS implantation. Careful outcome monitoring is required to identify the subset of patients experiencing a poor response and to make appropriate adjustments in care.

Anterior nucleus of the thalamus deep brain stimulation vs temporal lobe responsive neurostimulation for temporal lobe epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: Based on the promising results of randomized controlled trials, deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) are used increasingly in the treatment of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) is an indication for either DBS of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) or temporal lobe (TL) RNS, but there are no studies that directly compare the seizure benefits and adverse effects associated with these therapies in this patient population. We, therefore, examined all patients who underwent ANT-DBS or TL-RNS for drug-resistant TLE at our center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients who were treated with either ANT-DBS or TL-RNS for drug-resistant TLE with at least 12 months of follow-up. Along with the clinical characteristics of each patient's epilepsy, seizure frequency was recorded throughout each patient's postoperative clinical course. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients underwent ANT-DBS implantation and 32 patients underwent TL-RNS for drug-resistant TLE. The epilepsy characteristics of both groups were similar. Patients who underwent ANT-DBS demonstrated a median seizure reduction of 58% at 12-15 months, compared to a median seizure reduction of 70% at 12-15 months in patients treated with TL-RNS (p > .05). The responder rate (percentage of patients with a 50% decrease or more in seizure frequency) was 54% for ANT-DBS and 56% for TL-RNS (p > .05). The incidence of complications and stimulation-related side effects did not significantly differ between therapies. SIGNIFICANCE: We demonstrate in our single-center experience that patients with drug-resistant TLE benefit similarly from either ANT-DBS or TL-RNS. Selection of either ANT-DBS or TL-RNS may, therefore, depend more heavily on patient and provider preference, as each has unique capabilities and configurations. Future studies will consider subgroup analyses to determine if specific patients have greater seizure frequency reduction from one form of neuromodulation strategy over another.

Movement Disorders.

Movement disorders are commonly encountered by the general practitioner and can be divided into 2 broad categories: hypokinetic and hyperkinetic. The former involves loss or slowing of movement, whereas the latter is characterized by excessive and involuntary movements. A careful history will guide the examiner to the appropriate category of movement disorders. As no laboratory test or radiologic study is confirmatory for these disorders, diagnosis must be made clinically and the neurologic examination is indispensable. In this article, we discuss physical examination techniques that will help diagnose common movement disorders.

Post-infectious rhombencephalitis after coronavirus-19 infection: A case report and literature review.

A wide number of neurological manifestations have been described in association with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). We describe an unusual case of a young man who developed severe rhombencephalitis after COVID-19. He demonstrated clinical and radiological improvement with high dose corticosteroids, plasma exchange and intravenous immune globulin. Our findings, along with previously reported cases that we review here, support an autoimmune para- or post-infectious mechanism and highlight a possible role for immunotherapy in patients with rhombencephalitis after COVID-19.