Medline ® Abstracts for References 3,4

When someone asks the question, how good is ambulatory EEG telemetry, there is no correct answer. There are many manufacturers of ambulatory EEG technology. Each device has its own strengths and weaknesses. What one is really interested in when one asks such a question needs to be defined in terms of expectations and technical capabilities for the piece of equipment under discussion. Systems exist or can be easily modified to be as sophisticated as the best of the inpatient units. However, is that level of sophistication needed for the ambulatory based recordings? Again, the answer to that is dependent on the ordering physician's expectations. Below is a discussion of the different clinical expectations that are frequently encountered and the needed requirements for an ambulatory system to properly address them.

The aims of this study were (1) to define the role of long-term computer-assisted outpatient electroencephalographic monitoring (COEEG) in children and adolescents with known or suspected epilepsy, and (2) to compare COEEG data with routine interictal electroencephalograms (EEG). We performed 18-channel COEEG in 84 children and adolescents with diagnosed (group 1, n = 49) or suspected (group 2, n = 35) epilepsy. Mean recording time was 1.4 days. Overall, COEEG was useful in 87% of patients. In group 1, events were recorded in 73% of patients and were electrographic seizures in 45%. In group 2, events were detected in 86% of patients and were electrographic seizures in 17%. Nocturnal and partial seizures predominated. Seizure diagnosis and classification by COEEG was concordant with interictal EEG findings in 19% and discordant in 63% of patients. COEEG is a useful technique for the diagnosis of epileptic and nonepileptic events among selected children and adolescents. When compared to routine interictal EEG, COEEG could offer additional accuracy in the classification of seizures in pediatric patients.