Beniczky, Sándor

AbstractObjectiveWe published a list of “must‐know” routine EEG (rEEG) findings for trainees based on expert opinion. Here, we studied the accuracy and inter‐rater agreement (IRA) of these “must‐know” rEEG findings among international experts.MethodsA previously validated online rEEG examination was disseminated to EEG experts. It consisted of a survey and 30 multiple‐choice questions predicated on the previously published “must‐know” rEEG findings divided into four domains: normal, abnormal, normal variants, and artifacts. Questions contained de‐identified 10–20‐s epochs of EEG that were considered unequivocal examples by five EEG experts.ResultsThe examination was completed by 258 international EEG experts. Overall mean accuracy and IRA (AC1) were 81% and substantial (0.632), respectively. The domain‐specific mean accuracies and IRA were: 76%, moderate (0.558) (normal); 78%, moderate (0.575) (abnormal); 85%, substantial (0.678) (normal variants); 85%, substantial (0.740) (artifacts). Academic experts had a higher accuracy than private practice experts (82% vs. 77%; p = .035). Country‐specific overall mean accuracies and IRA were: 92%, almost perfect (0.836) (U.S.); 86%, substantial (0.762) (Brazil); 79%, substantial (0.646) (Italy); and 72%, moderate (0.496) (India). In conclusion, collective expert accuracy and IRA of “must‐know” rEEG findings are suboptimal and heterogeneous.SignificanceWe recommend the development and implementation of pragmatic, accessible, country‐specific ways to measure and improve the expert accuracy and IRA.

AbstractArtificial intelligence (AI) allows data analysis and integration at an unprecedented granularity and scale. Here we review the technological advances, challenges, and future perspectives of using AI for electro‐clinical phenotyping of animal models and patients with epilepsy. In translational research, AI models accurately identify behavioral states in animal models of epilepsy, allowing identification of correlations between neural activity and interictal and ictal behavior. Clinical applications of AI‐based automated and semi‐automated analysis of audio and video recordings of people with epilepsy, allow significant data reduction and reliable detection and classification of major motor seizures. AI models can accurately identify electrographic biomarkers of epilepsy, such as spikes, high‐frequency oscillations, and seizure patterns. Integrating AI analysis of electroencephalographic, clinical, and behavioral data will contribute to optimizing therapy for patients with epilepsy.

Importance Electroencephalograms (EEGs) are a fundamental evaluation in neurology but require special expertise unavailable in many regions of the world. Artificial intelligence (AI) has a potential for addressing these unmet needs. Previous AI models address only limited aspects of EEG interpretation such as distinguishing abnormal from normal or identifying epileptiform activity. A comprehensive, fully automated interpretation of routine EEG based on AI suitable for clinical practice is needed. Objective To develop and validate an AI model (Standardized Computer-based Organized Reporting of EEG–Artificial Intelligence [SCORE-AI]) with the ability to distinguish abnormal from normal EEG recordings and to classify abnormal EEG recordings into categories relevant for clinical decision-making: epileptiform-focal, epileptiform-generalized, nonepileptiform-focal, and nonepileptiform-diffuse. Design, Setting, and Participants In this multicenter diagnostic accuracy study, a convolutional neural network model, SCORE-AI, was developed and validated using EEGs recorded between 2014 and 2020. Data were analyzed from January 17, 2022, until November 14, 2022. A total of 30 493 recordings of patients referred for EEG were included into the development data set annotated by 17 experts. Patients aged more than 3 months and not critically ill were eligible. The SCORE-AI was validated using 3 independent test data sets: a multicenter data set of 100 representative EEGs evaluated by 11 experts, a single-center data set of 9785 EEGs evaluated by 14 experts, and for benchmarking with previously published AI models, a data set of 60 EEGs with external reference standard. No patients who met eligibility criteria were excluded. Main Outcomes and Measures Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity compared with the experts and the external reference standard of patients’ habitual clinical episodes obtained during video-EEG recording. Results The characteristics of the EEG data sets include development data set (N = 30 493; 14 980 men; median age, 25.3 years [95% CI, 1.3-76.2 years]), multicenter test data set (N = 100; 61 men, median age, 25.8 years [95% CI, 4.1-85.5 years]), single-center test data set (N = 9785; 5168 men; median age, 35.4 years [95% CI, 0.6-87.4 years]), and test data set with external reference standard (N = 60; 27 men; median age, 36 years [95% CI, 3-75 years]). The SCORE-AI achieved high accuracy, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between 0.89 and 0.96 for the different categories of EEG abnormalities, and performance similar to human experts. Benchmarking against 3 previously published AI models was limited to comparing detection of epileptiform abnormalities. The accuracy of SCORE-AI (88.3%; 95% CI, 79.2%-94.9%) was significantly higher than the 3 previously published models ( P < .001) and similar to human experts. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, SCORE-AI achieved human expert level performance in fully automated interpretation of routine EEGs. Application of SCORE-AI may improve diagnosis and patient care in underserved areas and improve efficiency and consistency in specialized epilepsy centers.

AbstractCorrectly diagnosing and classifying seizures and epilepsies is paramount to ensure the delivery of optimal care to patients with epilepsy. Focal seizures, defined as those that originate within networks limited to one hemisphere, are primarily subdivided into focal aware, focal impaired awareness, and focal to bilateral tonic–clonic seizures. Focal epilepsies account for most epilepsy cases both in children and adults. In children, focal epilepsies are typically subdivided in three groups: self‐limited focal epilepsy syndromes (e.g., self‐limited epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes), focal epilepsy of unknown cause but which do not meet criteria for a self‐limited focal epilepsy syndrome, and focal epilepsy of known cause (e.g., structural lesions—developmental or acquired). In adults, focal epilepsies are often acquired and may be caused by a structural lesion such as stroke, infection and traumatic brain injury, or brain tumors, vascular malformations, metabolic disorders, autoimmune, and/or genetic causes. In addition to seizure semiology, neuroimaging, neurophysiology, and neuropathology constitute the cornerstones of a diagnostic evaluation. Patients with focal epilepsy who become drug‐resistant should promptly undergo assessment in an epilepsy center. After excluding pseudo‐resistance, these patients should be considered for presurgical evaluation as a means to identify the location and extent of the epileptogenic zone and assess their candidacy for a surgical procedure. The goal of this seminar in epileptology is to summarize clinically relevant information concerning focal epilepsies. This contributes to the ILAE's mission to ensure that worldwide healthcare professionals, patients, and caregivers continue to have access to high‐quality educational resources concerning epilepsy.

Abstract This educational topical review and Task Force report aims to address learning objectives of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) curriculum. We sought to extract detailed features involving semiology from video recordings and interpret semiological signs and symptoms that reflect the likely localization for focal seizures in patients with epilepsy. This glossary was developed by a working group of the ILAE Commission on Diagnostic Methods incorporating the EEG Task Force. This paper identifies commonly used terms to describe seizure semiology, provides definitions, signs and symptoms, and summarizes their clinical value in localizing and lateralizing focal seizures based on consensus in the published literature. Video‐EEG examples are included to illustrate important features of semiology in patients with epilepsy.

Summary The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide recommendations on the indications and minimum standards for inpatient long‐term video‐electroencephalographic monitoring (LTVEM). The Working Group of the International League Against Epilepsy and the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology develop guidelines aligned with the Epilepsy Guidelines Task Force. We reviewed published evidence using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis) statement. We found limited high‐level evidence aimed at specific aspects of diagnosis for LTVEM performed to evaluate patients with seizures and nonepileptic events. For classification of evidence, we used the Clinical Practice Guideline Process Manual of the American Academy of Neurology. We formulated recommendations for the indications, technical requirements, and essential practice elements of LTVEM to derive minimum standards used in the evaluation of patients with suspected epilepsy using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Further research is needed to obtain evidence about long‐term outcome effects of LTVEM and to establish its clinical utility.