Nonepileptic Spells Research Articles

Evaluation of Patients Complaining of Staring Spells: Single Center Experience

Objective: This study aimed to analyze the demographic characteristics, spell semiology, and electroencephalographic characteristics of children with a complaint of staring spells and determine the factors that differentiate epileptic and non-epileptic etiology. Material and Methods: Fifty-six patients were included retrospectively between October 1, 2022, and December 1, 2023. The patients’ age, gender, co-morbidities, and other characteristics of the staring spells (duration, frequency, automatism, and presence of post-attack symptoms), access time to the pediatric neurologist, referring unit and access time to the final diagnosis were also recorded. Electroencephalography (EEG) was performed on all patients. Results: Fifty-six patients were divided into two according to epileptic and non-epileptic etiology. Thirty-three patients (59%) were diagnosed with non-epileptic staring spells, 15 (26.7%) were diagnosed with generalized epilepsy, and 8 (14.3%) were diagnosed with focal epilepsy. The non-epileptic group had a longer spell time and spell frequency, the presence of verbal stimulation response, and no post-attack symptoms (p<0.001). The access time to the pediatric neurologist was detected as 5.5 days, and the access time to the final diagnosis was 6.6 days. EEG was diagnostic in 100% of the epileptic group. Most of the patients were referred by pediatricians and family physicians (p<0.001). Conclusion: Identifying the cause of staring spells is crucial for further follow-up. In this study, we emphasized that history and routine EEG are important to determine the etiology. It has been observed that access time to pediatric neurologists and final diagnosis are shorter in our country compared to the literature. It can be concluded that pediatricians and family physicians have a high awareness of staring spells.

Waveform Window #56: Bilateral Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Misdiagnosed as Nonepileptic Spells

Waveform Window #56: Bilateral Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Misdiagnosed as Nonepileptic Spells

New-onset seizures misdiagnosed as psychogenic non-epileptic seizures: a case of paraneoplastic limbic encephalitis with primary testicular cancer

BackgroundBehavioral psychiatric symptoms can be the only warning signs of more serious conditions such as paraneoplastic limbic encephalitis. Differentiating between primary psychiatric disorders and paraneoplastic neurological syndromes is crucial as they require distinct treatment approaches. In this case report, we provide an overview of paraneoplastic encephalitis and introduce a unique case that showcases a misdiagnosis of psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES) in a male as the primary symptom of paraneoplastic encephalitis due to pure seminoma. This case highlights the underlying pathophysiology of antibody-mediated paraneoplastic encephalitis and its significance.Case presentationA 31-year-old male with no known past medical history presented due to recurrent seizures. There was no prior history of epilepsy or exposure to seizure-triggering agents. Imaging and electroencephalogram findings during his initial hospitalizations pointed to a potential diagnosis of PNES. The patient continued to experience seizures following discharge, leading to repeat hospitalizations. During the fourth hospitalization, the patient received mood-stabilizing anti-seizure medications and benzodiazepines, but he deteriorated and required intubation. It was during this time that the patient was transferred to our facility. Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain revealed multifocal areas of hyperintensity and restricted diffusion with avid enhancement. Immunotherapy was initiated with improvement of non-epileptic spells and encephalopathy. Outpatient workup uncovered malignant pure seminoma with metastases to the retroperitoneum. The authors theorize that paraneoplastic neurological disorders stemming from testicular cancer led to the neurological symptoms seen in this case.ConclusionThis report highlights a rare occurrence of paraneoplastic limbic encephalitis associated with pure testicular seminoma, clinically manifested as PNES. The diagnostic challenge posed by variability of presenting symptoms in paraneoplastic encephalitis emphasizes the importance of accurate differentiation from conditions such as autoimmune encephalitis. Current diagnostic approaches for paraneoplastic and autoimmune etiologies involve detection of known antibodies, as well as brain imaging. Notable antibodies associated with psychogenic non-epileptic seizures symptoms include anti-GAD-65, anti-Ma2, KLH11-antibodies, anti-Hu, and NMDA receptor antibodies. Recognizing paraneoplastic limbic encephalitis symptoms is challenging and often leads to misdiagnosis or overlooking of malignancies highlighting the need for awareness, comprehensive evaluation and timely treatment. Through this comprehensive case analysis, we enhance the understanding of underlying mechanisms, associated symptoms, and treatment options.

Accuracy of patient-reported spell duration: A comparative study

Clinicians rely heavily on patient histories to make medical diagnoses, most of which are inherently subjective and prone to inaccuracies. The aim of this study is to compare the subjective versus objective duration of spells through a retrospective chart review of patients admitted to the epilepsy monitoring unit at our tertiary care medical center. One hundred patients were analyzed. Differences in the accuracy of subjective estimations versus objective duration were compared by age, sex, focal versus generalized, location (frontal versus non-frontal), and spell type (focal aware versus impaired awareness and epileptic versus non-epileptic). Our data show that patients are poor subjective estimators, with 73% of patients overestimating the duration of their spells. We did not find differences in estimated duration by age, sex, seizure location or spell type. A notable exception was patients with generalized convulsive seizures, who accurately reported spell duration to within 17 s. This is likely because these seizures are stereotypical, and patients/family time them. Moreover, patients with non-epileptic spells were worse estimators of their spell duration than those with epileptic spells. In addition, although the prefrontal lobe plays a role in time estimation, we did not find that patients with frontal lobe seizures were worse estimators than those with non-frontal seizures, but invasive monitoring can more precisely localize seizures within areas of the frontal lobe responsible for time estimation. Our data emphasize the importance of not relying solely on patient-reported time estimation in diagnosing and developing treatment plans and instead instructing patients to time their spells.

Predictors of referral for long-term EEG monitoring for Medicare beneficiaries with drug-resistant epilepsy.

For people with drug-resistant epilepsy, the use of epilepsy surgery is low despite favorable odds of seizure freedom. To better understand surgery utilization, we explored factors associated with inpatient long-term EEG monitoring (LTM), the first step of the presurgical pathway. Using 2001-2018 Medicare files, we identified patients with incident drug-resistant epilepsy using validated criteria of ≥2 distinct antiseizure medication (ASM) prescriptions and ≥1 drug-resistant epilepsy encounter among patients with ≥2 years pre- and ≥1 year post-diagnosis Medicare enrollment. We used multilevel logistic regression to evaluate associations between LTM and patient, provider, and geographic factors. We then analyzed neurologist-diagnosed patients to further evaluate provider/environmental characteristics. Of 12 044 patients with incident drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis identified, 2% underwent surgery. Most (68%) were diagnosed by a neurologist. In total, 19% underwent LTM near/after drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis; another 4% only underwent LTM much prior to diagnosis. Patient factors most strongly predicting LTM were age <65 (adjusted odds ratio 1.5 [95% confidence interval 1.3-1.8]), focal epilepsy (1.6 [1.4-1.9]), psychogenic non-epileptic spells diagnosis (1.6 [1.1-2.5]) prior hospitalization (1.7, [1.5-2]), and epilepsy center proximity (1.6 [1.3-1.9]). Additional predictors included female gender, Medicare/Medicaid non-dual eligibility, certain comorbidities, physician specialties, regional neurologist density, and prior LTM. Among neurologist-diagnosed patients, neurologist <10 years from graduation, near an epilepsy center, or epilepsy-specialized increased LTM likelihood (1.5 [1.3-1.9], 2.1 [1.8-2.5], 2.6 [2.1-3.1], respectively). In this model, 37% of variation in LTM completion near/after diagnosis was explained by individual neurologist practice and/or environment rather than measurable patient factors (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.37). A small proportion of Medicare beneficiaries with drug-resistant epilepsy completed LTM, a proxy for epilepsy surgery referral. While some patient factors and access measures predicted LTM, non-patient factors explained a sizable proportion of variance in LTM completion. To increase surgery utilization, these data suggest initiatives targeting better support of neurologist referral.

Evaluation of the Patient With Paroxysmal Spells Mimicking Epileptic Seizures.

The diagnostic issue of paroxysmal spells, including epileptic seizure (ES) mimics, is one that neurologists frequently encounter. This review provides an up-to-date overview of the most common causes of ES mimics encountered in the outpatient setting. Paroxysmal spells are characterized by changes in awareness, attention, perception, or abnormal movements. These can be broadly classified as ES and nonepileptic spells (NES). NES mimics ES but are distinguished by their symptomatology and lack of epileptiform activity on electroencephalography. NES may have psychological or physiological underpinnings. Psychogenic non-ES are the most common mimics of ES. Physiological causes of NES include syncope, cerebrovascular, movement, and sleep-related disorders. Distinguishing NES from ES at times may be challenging even to the most experienced clinicians. However, detailed history with an emphasis on the clinical clues, including taking a moment-by-moment history of the event from the patient and observers and physical examination, helps create an appropriate differential diagnosis to guide further diagnostic testing. An accurate diagnosis of NES prevents iatrogenic harm, including unnecessary exposure to antiseizure medications and overuse of health care resources. It also allows for the correct specialist referral and appropriate treatment.

Use of video alone for differentiation of epileptic seizures from non-epileptic spells: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionReview of videos (without electroencephalography) to differentiate epileptic seizures (ES) from non-epileptic spells (NES) may be helpful where epilepsy monitoring is not feasible. Previous studies of video-based diagnosis have suffered from variable accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. MethodsWe systematically reviewed relevant literature in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to September 2022, identifying articles that reported on the video-based diagnosis of ES and NES. In primary analysis, for each study, the most expert group was chosen when different groups of reviewers classified the videos (e.g., epilepsy specialists and general neurologists). In secondary analysis, we compared the diagnostic accuracy of different expertise levels (e.g., epileptologists, general neurologists, residents, medical students). Meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled estimates of reliability measures. ResultsFrom 5245 articles identified, 13 met the inclusion criteria, with cumulative data from 683 patients (696 videos) reviewed by 95 independent reviewers in primary analysis. Video alone had a strong ability to differentiate ES from NES as evidenced by the following metrics- area under the curve- 0.9 (considered “outstanding”), sensitivity- 82.2% (95% Confidence Interval [C.I], 80.2%-84.0%), specificity- 84.7% (C.I., 82.8%-86.5%), and diagnostic odds ratio- 24.7 (C.I., 11.5–52.9). The secondary analysis showed reviewer-dependent accuracy with epileptologists showing the highest accuracy (DOR 81.2, C.I., 90.0%-94.6%). ConclusionsVideo alone has reliable diagnostic performance for differentiating ES from NES. Meta-analysis limitations include inter-study heterogeneity including variable video quality and reviewer expertise. Combined video-EEG remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of epilepsy and NES.

Assessing Biases in the Diagnosis of Psychogenic Non-Epileptic Spells (PNES) (P14-1.009)

<h3>Objective:</h3> Assessing types of biases in diagnosing psychogenic non-epileptic spells (PNES). <h3>Background:</h3> There is an established female predominance among patients diagnosed with PNES. While there have been neurobiological differences identified for this predominance, there lies the possibility of a misdiagnosis based on gender, increasing morbidity in these patients. Another survey found that African-Americans presenting with seizures are less likely to be admitted to the hospital or to undergo urgent neuroimaging compared to Caucasians, independent of insurance status. <h3>Design/Methods:</h3> A retrospective chart review was conducted at University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center between January 2011 and December 2020 from electronic medical records (EMR). Patients greater than 5 years of age who were admitted to Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) were included and data regarding gender, race and education level was recorded using the REDCAP database system. <h3>Results:</h3> Of the 384 patients admitted to EMU, 62%(n=239) and 38 %(n=145) were women and men, respectively. 52%(n=122) of women were suspected to have PNES on initial visit out of which 50%(n=61) were concordant with both initial and EMU diagnosis of PNES. 36% (n=51) of men were suspected to have PNES in office out of which 43%(n=22) fell into the concordant group (agreement in initially suspected and final EMU diagnosis of PNES). 49%(n=66) Caucasians, 36%(n=5) African-Americans, 38%(n=8) patients with college level education and 27%(n=3) with elementary level education were in the concordant group. These differences were statistically significant in all of the aforementioned categories (McNemar’s Exact test, all p-values &lt;0.002). <h3>Conclusions:</h3> There appears to be a small but significant difference in diagnosis of PNES depending on gender, age and race. Further large multi-center studies are needed to evaluate the differences. Once such biases and health disparities are uncovered, we can identify and address them ensuring accurate diagnosis leading to treatment and management in a timely manner reducing morbidity for our patients. <b>Disclosure:</b> Dr. Bhutta has nothing to disclose. Dr. Bailey has nothing to disclose. Mr. Wolmarans has nothing to disclose. Dr. Mallum has nothing to disclose. Mr. Grunsted has nothing to disclose. Dr. Durica has nothing to disclose. Dr. Sebasigari has nothing to disclose.

Hypomyelination with Atrophy of Basal Ganglia and Cerebellum (HABC) Due to UFM1 Mutation in Roma Patients - Severe Early Encephalopathy with Stridor and Severe Hearing and Visual Impairment. A Single Center Experience.

Hypomyelination with atrophy of the basal ganglia and cerebellum (H-ABC) is a neurodegenerative disease with neurodevelopmental delay, motor, and speech regression, pronounced extrapyramidal syndrome, and sensory deficits due to TUBB4A mutation. In 2017, a severe variant was described in 16 Roma infants due to mutation in UFM1. The objective of this study is to expand the clinical manifestations of H-ABC due to UFM1 mutation and suggest clues for clinical diagnosis. Retrospective analysis of all 9 cases with H-ABC due to c.-273_-271delTCA mutation in UFM1 treated during 2013-2020 in a Neuropediatric Ward in Plovdiv, Bulgaria. Presentation is no later than 2 months with inspiratory stridor, impaired sucking, swallowing, vision and hearing, and reduced active movements. By the age of 10 months, a monomorphic disease was observed: microcephaly (6/9), malnutrition (5/9), muscle hypertonia (9/9) and axial hypotonia (4/9), progressing to opisthotonus (6/9), dystonic posturing (5/9), nystagmoid ocular movements (6/9), epileptic seizures (4/9), non-epileptic spells (3/9). Dysphagia (7/9), inspiratory stridor (9/9), dyspnea (5/9), bradypnea (5/9), apnea (2/9) were major signs. Vision and hearing were never achieved or lost by 4-8 mo. Neurodevelopment was absent or minimal with subsequent regression after 2-5 mo. Brain imaging revealed cortical atrophy (7/9), atrophic ventricular dilatation (4/9), macrocisterna magna (5/9), reduced myelination (6/6), corpus callosum atrophy (3/6) and abnormal putamen and caput nuclei caudati. The age at death was between 8 and 18 mo. Roma patients with severe encephalopathy in early infancy with stridor, opisthotonus, bradypnea, severe hearing and visual impairment should be tested for the Roma founder mutation of H-ABC in UFM1.

Indications for continuous electroencephalographic (cEEG) monitoring: What do they tell us?

ObjectiveWhile studies have explored clinical and EEG predictors of seizures on continuous EEG (cEEG), the role of cEEG indications as predictors of seizures has not been studied. Our study aims to fill this knowledge gap. MethodsWe used the prospective cEEG database at Cleveland Clinic for the 2016 calendar year. Patients ≥ 18 years who underwent cEEG for the indication of altered mental status (AMS) and seizure-like events (SLE: motor or patient-reported events) were included. Baseline characteristics and EEG findings were compared between the two groups. Multivariable regression was used to compare the two groups and identify seizure detection risk factors. ResultsOf 2227 patients (mean age 59.4 years) who met the inclusion criteria, 882 (50% females) underwent cEEG for AMS and 1345(51% females) for SLE. SLE patients were younger(OR: 0.988, CI: 0.98–0.99, p < 0.001), had longer monitoring(OR:1.04, CI:1.00–1.07, p = 0.033), were more likely to have epilepsy-related-breakthrough seizures(OR:25.9, CI:0.5.89–115, p < 0.001), psychogenic non-epileptic spells (OR:6.85, CI:1.60–29.3, p = 0.008), were more awake (p < 0.001) and more likely to be on anti-seizure medications(OR:1.60, CI:1.29–1.98, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, SLE was an independent predictor of seizure detection (OR: 2.60, CI: 1.77–3.88, p < 0.001). SignificanceOur findings highlight the differences in patients undergoing cEEG for AMS vs. SLE. SLE as a cEEG indication represents an independent predictor of seizures on cEEG and, therefore, deserves special attention. Future multicenter studies are needed to validate our findings.

Staring spells in children with autism spectrum disorder: A clinical dilemma.

It is a common occurrence for children with autism spectrum disorder to be diagnosed with staring spells. Staring spells are defined as periods of time when children "space out" and are subcategorized as either "absence seizures" (brain activity resembling a seizure but with no physical seizure symptoms) or "non-epileptic spells" (inattentiveness or daydreaming). Due to the subtle characteristics of staring spells, they are usually diagnosed via long-term video electroencephalogram. The child is monitored for 3-5 days with an electroencephalogram which records brain waves. An electroencephalogram may be difficult to perform in children with autism spectrum disorder due to behavior, cognitive, or sensory concerns. Therefore, we wanted to investigate other clinical characteristics that may help us differentiate between epileptic seizures versus non-epileptic spells in children with autism spectrum disorder presenting with staring spells. We reviewed 140 charts retrospectively from the years of 2010-2021. We abstracted demographic and clinical information from the electronic medical record system and reviewed electroencephalogram videos to group the 140 children into epileptic seizure diagnosis group versus non-epileptic spell group. Of the 140 children in this study, 22 were diagnosed with epileptic seizures and the remaining were diagnosed with non-epileptic spells. We found that the two groups differed in certain clinical characteristics such as how long the staring spells lasted, how many staring spells the child had in 1 week, and whether they responded to verbal commands. We believe that clinical features may be helpful in differentiating epileptic seizures from non-epileptic spells in children with autism spectrum disorder.

Staring Spells: An Age-based Approach Toward Differential Diagnosis.

Evaluations to rule out epileptic vs nonepileptic staring spells may entail unnecessary evaluations that can be costly and time consuming. Our study aims to identify common etiologies for staring spells across 3 different pediatric age groups and to propose an age-based clinical guidance to help determine which patients warrant further workup. Methods: This was a single-center retrospective chart analysis of 1496 patients aged 0.0-17.9 years presenting with confirmed staring spell diagnosis from January 2011 to January 2021. The patients were divided into 3 groups based on their age: 0.0-2.9, 3.0-12.9, and 13.0-17.9 years. Patient information collected included demographics, clinical presentation, comorbidities, and final diagnosis. Multilevel likelihood ratios and a receiver operating characteristic curve were determined using 8 of the 11 clinical variables. A total of 1142 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included for the final analysis. The most common final diagnosis was attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (35%), followed by normal behavior (33%). Generalized and focal epilepsy were diagnosed in 8% and 4% of the patients, respectively. In the 0.0-2.9-year age group, normal behavior was the final diagnosis in 72% patients. In the 3.0-12.9-year and 13.0-17.9-year age groups, ADHD was the most frequent final diagnosis in 46% and 60%, respectively. Overall, ADHD and normal behaviors remain the most common final diagnoses. Multilevel likelihood ratios can be used to develop an age-based guidance to differentiate between epileptic and nonepileptic staring spell diagnoses.

Staring Spells: How to Distinguish Epileptic Seizures from Nonepileptic Staring.

To determine the nature of staring spells and factors distinguishing epileptic from nonepileptic staring spells, we studied the clinical and demographic features of children with staring spells referred to a regional new-onset seizure clinic. Our retrospective chart review encompassed 2818 consecutive patients evaluated in the new-onset seizure clinic between September 22, 2015, and March 19, 2018. We identified 121 patients with newly presenting staring spells. Sixty-two of 121 (51%) children were diagnosed with nonepileptic staring spells and 59 (49%) with epileptic seizures (24 with absence epilepsy, 35 with focal epilepsy). Patients with nonepileptic staring spells were younger (4.8 vs 7.1 years, P = .001) and more likely to have developmental delay (P = .005) than the seizure group. There was an 8.9-month delay on average from the onset of staring spells to the new-onset seizure clinic visit. The emergency department was a referral source for 80% (28/35) of focal seizures. In children with focal seizures, the staring spells typically lasted >1minute (29/35, 83%), whereas only 19 of 62 (31%) of children with nonepileptic staring spells had events lasting this long (P = .04). All children had a routine electroencephalography (EEG) on the day of new-onset seizure clinic visit. EEG was diagnostic in 100% (24/24) of absence seizures and 51% (18/35) of focal seizures. In children presenting with staring spells, the differential diagnosis of epileptic staring spells vs nonepileptic staring spells can be made by history and routine EEG. Staring was as likely to be epileptic as nonepileptic spells. Younger children with developmental delay were more likely to have nonepileptic events. Our simple approach based on event duration, postictal symptoms, and EEG allowed identification of epileptic staring on first visit to new-onset seizure clinic but requires validation in future prospective studies including long-term video EEG monitoring and follow-up.

Brain magnetic resonance imaging findings and brain volumetric differences in a large series of benign rolandic epilepsy.

Several studies with a small sample size have investigated the relationship between structural and functional changes on MRI and the clinical and natural history of BRE. We aim to assess the frequency of incidental epileptogenic lesions on brain MRI in a large cohort of patients diagnosed with BRE and to assess the difference in volumetric brain measurements in BRE patients compared to healthy controls. The case-control study includes 214 typical BRE cases and 197 control children with non-epileptic spells. Brain MRIs were evaluated for abnormalities which were classified into normal and abnormal with or without epileptogenic lesions with categorization of epileptogenic lesions. Brain segmentation was also performed for a smaller group of BRE patients and another healthy control group. Pearson's chi-squared test and two-tailed independent samples t-test were used. In patients with BRE, 7% had an epileptogenic lesion on their MRI. The frequency of epileptogenic lesion in the control group was 10.2% and not significantly different from those with BRE (p= 0.2). Significantly higher intracranial and white matter volumes were found in BRE patients compared to the healthy group while lower gray matter volume was found in BRE patients. Cortical and subcortical regions showed either higher or lower volumes with BRE. Interestingly, altered subcallosal cortex development which has a known association with depression was also found in BRE. Our findings confirm the absence of any association between specific brain MRI abnormalities and BRE. However, the altered cortical and subcortical development in BRE patients suggests a microstructural-functional correlation.

A Case Report of “Propofol Frenzy”: Anesthetic Considerations for a Severe Propofol-Induced Neuroexcitation Reaction

Propofol "frenzy" is considered a severe propofol-induced neuroexcitatory reaction involving nonepileptic spells of extremity thrashing, marked agitation, irregular eye movements, and impaired consciousness. Patients with propofol neuroexcitation present unique challenges for anesthesia providers due to underrecognition, lack of diagnostic tests, and differentiating from other comparable disorders that require medications that can exacerbate symptoms. We present a case of a healthy young patient whose postoperative course was complicated by propofol frenzy and functional limb paralysis following hip surgery with a spinal anesthetic and propofol sedation. This case highlights anesthesia considerations for propofol frenzy and discusses dexmedetomidine as a promising modality for prompt management.

The importance of acknowledging diagnostic uncertainty in patients with new-onset paroxysmal spells.

ObjectiveThe aims of this study were to evaluate the frequency of paroxysmal spells of indeterminate nature (PSIN) in a large cohort of children and adults with suspected new‐onset seizures, to evaluate the reasons for including patients in this category, and to calculate the rate of erroneous diagnoses if the epileptologists were compelled to label those events as epileptic seizures or nonepileptic paroxysmal spells.MethodsPatients identified for this study participated in a prospective study evaluating patients with suspected new‐onset unprovoked seizures. The workup included a detailed history and a thorough description of the spells, a 3‐hour video EEG recording, and an epilepsy protocol brain MRI. Based exclusively on a detailed description of the ictal events, two epileptologists were asked to independently classify each patient into those with a definite diagnosis of unprovoked seizures or a definite diagnosis of a nonepileptic paroxysmal spells (group 1) and those with PSIN (group 2).ResultsA total of 1880 consecutive patients were enrolled with 255 (13.6%) included in the PSIN group. Patients with PSIN were significantly younger than those with a definite diagnosis, and PSIN were significantly more frequent in children with developmental delay. The most common reason for including patients in the PSIN group was the inability to categorically discriminate between a seizure and a nonepileptic mimicker. When the raters were compelled to classify the spells in the PSIN group, the frequencies of erroneous diagnoses ranged between 32% and 38%. The final diagnoses on those patients were made based on the results of the EEG, MRI, and follow‐up visits.SignificanceOur data indicate that a diagnostic category of PSIN should be recognized and ought to be used in clinical practice. Acknowledging this uncertainty will result in lower frequencies of erroneous diagnoses, possible stigma, and potential exposure to unnecessary antiseizure medications.

Association between kinetic semiology of psychogenic nonepileptic spells and seizure type in dual disorder

PurposeEpilepsy is diagnosed in 20% of patients with psychogenic nonepileptic spells (PNES). The semiology of PNES and epileptic seizures (ES) overlaps in some patients. It is unclear whether the motor phenotype of PNES predicts the type of ES. MethodsVideo segments of EEGs in patients with PNES and ES treated in the Epilepsy Monitoring Unit at the University of Nebraska Medical Center were reviewed. Videos were categorized according to the validated motor-based classification of PNES. Ratings of kinetic PNES events were analyzed to determine if there was an association with focal or generalized ES. If available, the video segments of ES were categorized as hypokinetic or hyperkinetic based on the constellation of focal or generalized movements and other semiological features. ResultsAmong 43 patients with documented PNES–ES (median age 34, interquartile range (IQR) 26–45), 27.9% were male. The largest proportion of patients (39.5%) had focal temporal epilepsy (TE). Other diagnostic groups included focal frontal (FE, 25.6%), generalized (GE, 25.6%), or other (9.3%) epilepsies. Thirty-three PNES patients (82.5%) were rated as having a hypokinetic phenotype. On average, hypokinetic PNES patients were receiving a median of 3 (IQR 2–4) anticonvulsants, compared to a median of 2 (IQR 2–3) in hyperkinetic PNES patients (p = 0.06). While the group with coexisting FE had a higher prevalence of hyperkinetic semiology (45.4%) than either the TE (11.7%) or GE (18.1%) patients, there was no significant association between the ES type and kinetic status of PNES. Among 20 patients who had video recordings of both PNES and ES, 40% displayed the concordant hypokinetic phenotypes for PNES and seizures while 15% had hyperkinetic presentation of both event types. Among additional 16 patients with scalp EEG-negative suspected nonepileptic events and documented ES, 6 had the recordings of seizures and 3 have presented with concordant hypokinetic PNES and ES. ConclusionIn patients with PNES and ES, the hypokinetic semiology of PNES prevails over hyperkinetic semiology in TE and GE syndromes. The motor status of PNES does not predict the phenotype of coexisting ES. The concordant kinetic semiology is present in more than half of the patients with dual diagnosis and available video data.

Identification of Generalized Convulsive Status Epilepticus from Emergency Medical Service Records: A Validation Study of Diagnostic Coding

Background Generalized convulsive status epilepticus (GCSE) is a neurologic emergency demanding prehospital identification and treatment. Evaluating real-world practice requires accurately identifying the target population; however, it is unclear whether emergency medical services (EMS) documentation accurately identifies patients with GCSE. Objective To evaluate the validity of EMS diagnostic impressions for GCSE. Methods This was an analysis of electronic medical records of a California county EMS system from 2013 to 2018. We identified all cases with a primary diagnostic impression of “seizure-active,” “seizure-post,” or “seizure-not otherwise specified (NOS)” and within each diagnostic category, we randomly selected 75 adult and 25 pediatric records. Two authors reviewed the provider narrative of these 300 charts to determine a clinical seizure diagnosis according to prespecified definitions. We calculated a kappa for interrater reliability of the clinical diagnosis. We then calculated the positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, and specificity of an EMS diagnosis of “seizure-active” diagnosis for identifying GCSE. Sensitivity and specificity calculations were weighted according to the distribution of seizure cases in the overall population. We performed a descriptive analysis of records with an incorrect EMS diagnosis of GCSE or seizure. Results Of 38,995 total records for seizure, there were 3401 (8.7%) seizure-active cases, 12,478 (32.0%) seizure-NOS cases, and 23,116 (59.4%) seizure-post cases. An EMS diagnosis of “seizure-active” had a PPV of 65.0% (95% CI 54.8–74.3), sensitivity of 54.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 39.3–69.0), and specificity of 96.6% (95% CI 95.1–97.6) for capturing GCSE. Limiting the case definition to patients who received an EMS diagnosis of “seizure-active” and were treated with a benzodiazepine increased the PPV (80.2%; 95% CI 69.9–88.2) and specificity (99.3%; 95% CI 98.7–99.6) while the sensitivity decreased (25.1%; 95% CI 17.0–35.3). Across the 300 records reviewed, there were 19 (6.3%) patients who had a non-seizure related diagnosis including non-epileptic spells (7 records), altered mental status (8 records), tremors (2 records), anxiety (1 record), and stroke (1 record). Conclusions EMS diagnostic impressions have reasonable PPV and specificity but low sensitivity for GCSE. Improved coding algorithms and training will allow for improved benchmarking, quality improvement, and research about this neurologic emergency.

Utilization of Brain Imaging in Evaluating Patients with Psychogenic Nonepileptic Spells

Utilization of Brain Imaging in Evaluating Patients with Psychogenic Nonepileptic Spells

Comparison of psychiatric comorbidities and impact on quality of life in patients with epilepsy or psychogenic nonepileptic spells

ObjectivesPsychiatric comorbidity is common in people with epilepsy (PWE) and psychogenic nonepileptic spells (PNES). These comorbidities can be detrimental to quality of life (QOL) and are often underdiagnosed and undertreated. Some types of epilepsy, such as focal temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), have been associated with higher rates of psychiatric comorbidity. This study examined the impact of psychiatric comorbidity on QOL in patients admitted to two level 4 epilepsy monitoring units (EMUs). MethodsIn this prospective observational study, 200 patients admitted to two level 4 EMUs completed standardized surveys including the Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QOLIE-31-P), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Hierarchal multiple regression was performed to assess impact on QOL. ResultsOf the 200 participants, 113 had a diagnosis of epilepsy, 36 had a diagnosis of PNES, and 51 were excluded for nondiagnostic evaluation or dual diagnosis. Of those with epilepsy, 65 had TLE, 28 had focal extratemporal lobe epilepsy (ETLE), and 20 had nonfocal epilepsy. Patients with PNES had higher self-reported anxiety and depression levels (GAD-7: p = 0.04, PHQ-9: p < 0.01; BDI-II: p < 0.01) but similar QOL to PWE (p = 0.78). Using hierarchal multiple regression, symptoms of anxiety and depression were significant predictors of lower QOL in PWE but not in patients with PNES. There was no difference in QOL in those with ETLE and TLE. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that self-reported anxiety and depression symptoms are common in patients admitted to level 4 EMUs regardless of diagnosis and play an important role in predicting QOL in PWE. Our findings emphasize the importance of routinely screening all EMU patients for psychiatric comorbidity.