视频脑电图和常规脑电图在癫痫疾病诊断及病灶定位中的应用价值
作者: |
1邱元英,
1袁肖征
1 安徽皖北煤电集团总医院神经功能疾病科,安徽 宿州 234000 |
通讯: |
袁肖征
Email: can.dou@163.com |
DOI: | 10.3978/j.issn.2095-6959.2022.02.010 |
摘要
目的:探讨视频脑电图(video electroencephalogram,VEEG)和常规脑电图(routine electroencephalogram,REEG)对癫痫疾病诊断及病灶定位的应用价值。方法:选取2020年1月至2020年12月安徽皖北煤电集团总医院癫痫中心收治的103例疑似癫痫患者,患者均接受REEG和VEEG检查。比较2种脑电图检查方法对受检者痫性放电、临床症状以及同步临床发作的检出率,分析VEEG检出痫性放电的时相特征和癫痫患者病灶的定位情况。结果:VEEG痫性放电、临床症状、同步临床发作检出率分别为76.69%(79/103)、46.60%(48/103)和53.16%(42/79),均明显高于REEG的44.66%(46/103)、18.45%(19/103)、19.57%(9/46),差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。在VEEG检出的79例痫性放电患者中,睡眠期VEEG检出率为65.82%(52/79),高于清醒期的24.05%(19/79),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);在VEEG睡眠期检出痫性放电的52例患者中,非快速眼动睡眠期(non-REM sleep,NREM) I~II期、III~IV期、REM期分别占78.85%(41/52)、17.31%(9/52)、3.85%(2/52),上述脑电图时相痫性放电检出率比较,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。REEG、VEEG临床确诊癫痫分别为9例和42例,VEEG确定病灶部位为颞叶区15例,额叶区11例,枕叶区8例,中央区5例以及大脑半球皮层区3例。结论:与REEG比较,VEEG更能充分了解脑电活动信息和临床发作情况,为癫痫疾病诊断和病灶定位提供依据。
关键词:
癫痫;视频脑电图;常规脑电图;诊断;定位;应用价值
Application value of video electroencephalogram and routine electroencephalogram in the diagnosis and localization of epilepsy
CorrespondingAuthor: YUAN Xiaozheng Email: can.dou@163.com
DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2095-6959.2022.02.010
Abstract
Objective: To explore the application value of video electroencephalogram (VEEG) and routine electroencephalogram (REEG) in the diagnosis and localization of epilepsy. Methods: A total of 103 patients with suspected epilepsy admitted to the epilepsy center of Wanbei Coal-electricity Group General Hospital from January 2020 to December 2020 were selected. and they were examined by REEG and VEEG. The detection rates of epileptic discharges, clinical symptoms and synchronous clinical seizures were compared between the two EEG methods. The temporal characteristics of epileptic discharges detected by VEEG and the location of epileptic lesions were analyzed. Results: The detection rates of epileptic discharge, clinical symptoms, and synchronous clinical attack in VEEG were 76.69% (79/103), 46.60% (48/103), and 53.16% (42/79), respectively, which were significantly higher than those in REEG [44.66% (46/103), 18.45% (19/103), and 19.57% (9/46), respectively (all P<0.05)]. Among the 79 patients with epileptic discharge detected by VEEG, the detection rate of VEEG in sleep phase was 65.82% (52/79), which was higher than that in awake phase 24.05% (19/79), and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Among the 52 patients with epileptiform discharge during sleep, NREM I–II, III–IV, and REM accounted for 78.85% (41/52), 17.31% (9/52), and 3.85% (2/52), respectively. There was significant differences in the detection rates of epileptiform discharge in the above EEG phases (all P<0.05). There were 9 cases of epilepsy diagnosed by REEG and 42 cases by VEEG. The lesions were located in temporal lobe in 15 cases, frontal lobe in 11 cases, occipital lobe in 8 cases, central region in 5 cases, and cerebral cortex in 3 cases. Conclusion: Compared with REEG, VEEG can more fully understand the EEG activity information and clinical seizures, and provide the basis for the diagnosis and lesion location of epilepsy.
Keywords:
epilepsy; video electroencephalogram; routine electroencephalogram; diagnosis; location; application value