AzTrials
AzTrials

EpilepsyCIEDNCT03533374

Validation of Criteria for Identification of Epileptiform Discharges in EEG Recordings of Patients With Epilepsy

An observational study of Epilepsy and Non-Epileptic Seizure, run by Sándor Beniczky.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Electroencephalography (EEG) records electric activity of the brain using electrodes placed on the scalp. EEG is an important tool in the diagnostic work-up of patients with epilepsy. Specific types of sharp EEG discharges (epileptiform discharges) are associated with patients with epilepsy. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Any age
Conditions the study is for
Epilepsy, Non-Epileptic Seizure
What is being tested?
Electroencephalogram (EEG) and visual evaluation
How many people
100 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
1 Jan 2012to 1 Jan 2018
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages Any age
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Study population: Patient with epilepsy and patient with non-epileptic seizures (paroxysmal episodes)

Who may be able to join

  • Patients who underwent long-term video-EEG monitoring
  • Patients who had at least one habitual episode (seizure) recorded on video and EEG.
  • Patients with sharp transients.
  • For patients with epilepsy: the interictal (epileptiform) sharp transients are concordant with the ictal recording

Who cannot join

  • Patients with both epileptic seizures and non-epileptic seizures (paroxysmal episodes).

About this study

Official title: Clinical Validation of Criteria for Identification of Epileptiform Electroencephalography Discharges in Sensor Space and Source Space

Electroencephalography (EEG) records electric activity of the brain using electrodes placed on the scalp. EEG is an important tool in the diagnostic work-up of patients with epilepsy. Specific types of sharp EEG discharges (epileptiform discharges) are associated with patients with epilepsy.

The International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN) has recently published a set of six operational criteria for identifying epileptiform discharges. At least four criteria need to be present in order to classify a discharge as epileptiform. These criteria are largely based on expert opinion and have not been validated yet. It is not clear what the sensitivity and specificity of these criteria are, and which combination of these criteria are optimal. Each criterion is based on visual assessment. However, it is not known what the inter-rater agreement of these criteria are.

Read more

EEG is traditionally inspected in sensor space, i.e. in the recording channels. Advances in signal analysis made possible reconstructing the electric currents in the regions of the brain generating them, and displaying the signals in the source space, instead of the sensor space.

The objectives of this study are: to determine the inter-rater agreement of the IFCN criteria by visual analysis in sensor space, to determine the combination of criteria with the best accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) and assess the accuracy of evaluating the discharges in source space.

The raters will analyze EEG recordings from 100 patients, from two groups: consecutive patients with epilepsy and consecutive patients with non-epileptic paroxysmal episodes. EEG was recorded during long-term video-EEG monitoring. As reference standard, the investigators used the evaluation of the patients´ habitual clinical episode. The performance of the criteria in sensor-space and the analysis in source space will be compared with the unrestricted expert scorings.

Read the detailed description

Epilepsy affects 50 million people of all ages. It is the most common neurologic disorder across the lifespan, and has been found to be associated with an increased risk of mortality compared to the general population.

EEG is an important tool in the diagnostic work-up of patients with suspected epilepsy. The presence of epileptiform EEG discharges (EDs) confirm the diagnosis and provides important information that helps in classifying epilepsy.

EDs are visually identified by experts with training in reading EEG. Although EDs were defined in the previous edition of the IFCN glossary of terms, that definition was conceptual, and the inter-rater agreement for identifying EDs was only moderate. Recently, the IFCN suggested the following operational definition for EDs: Transients distinguishable from background activity with a characteristic morphology; EDs have to fulfill at least 4 of the following 6 criteria:

  1. Di- or tri-phasic waves with sharp or spiky morphology (i.e. pointed peak).
  2. Different wave-duration than the ongoing background activity: either shorter or longer.
  3. Asymmetry of the waveform: a sharply rising ascending phase and a more slowly decaying descending phase, or vice versa.
  4. The transient is followed by an associated slow after-wave.
  5. The background activity surrounding epileptiform discharges is disrupted by the presence of the epileptiform discharges.
  6. Distribution of the negative and positive potentials on the scalp suggests a source of the signal in the brain, corresponding to a radial, oblique or tangential orientation of the source. This is best assessed by inspecting voltage maps constructed using common-average reference.

However, these criteria are largely based on expert opinion. Data from clinical validation studies are lacking, thus it is not known what the sensitivity and specificity of these methods are. The threshold of four fulfilled criteria was arbitrary, and it is not sure whether it yields the optimal accuracy (sensitivity and specificity). Furthermore, since each criterion is based on visual evaluation, it is not known whether all experts would reach the same conclusion.

The IFCN criteria were developed for identifying EDs using the traditional way of inspecting EEG, in the channels of the recording electrodes (sensor space). However, advances in signal analysis made possible to reproduce the electric currents in the brain regions, using a spatial filtering method (source space).

The objective of this study are:

  1. To determine the inter-rater agreement for the IFCN criteria
  2. To determine the number of criteria and their combination that yields the highest diagnostic accuracy
  3. To determine the accuracy of identifying EDs in source space. Raters with experience in clinical EEG will inspect 100 anonymized EEG samples, from consecutive patients with epilepsy and consecutive patients with non-epileptic paroxysmal episodes. All 100 patients have a reference standard for their condition, derived from analysis of their video-EEG recordings of their habitual clinical episode. Patients with both focal and generalized epilepsy, as well as non-epileptic paroxysmal episodes (psychogenic non-epileptic seizures, sleep-disorders, movement disorders, convulsive syncope) are included.

Each EEG sample contains a sharp transient that is either epileptiform or not. EEGs were recoded using the IFCN electrode array of 25 electrodes (including the ones in the inferior temporal chain).

The samples were randomized twice, resulting in two series containing the same set of 100 samples, though with different codes and in different order of presentation. The raters will inspect the two series separately. In the first session the raters will inspect samples in sensor space, using traditional EEG montages (longitudinal and transversal bipolar; common average) and voltage maps. For each sample, they will score the presence or absence of each IFCN criterion. In the second session, the raters will inspect the EEG samples in source space and voltage maps, and will conclude on the presence / absence of EDs.

The performance of these methods will be compared with unrestricted scorings based on the experts´ evaluation.

Being tested
Electroencephalogram (EEG) and visual evaluation
Keywords
Accuracy, Inter-ictal EEG Discharges, Inter-rater agreement, Long Term Monitoring, Sensitivity, Sharp transients, Specificity, Source Space, Voltage maps
Medical subject headings
Epilepsy, Seizures, Hypersensitivity

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Electroencephalogram (EEG) and visual evaluationDiagnostic test

    Electroencephalogram (EEG) was recorded using Nicolet-One system, and the standard 25-electrode array. Recordings with sharp transients are inspected by experts (physicians).

Study groups in NCT03533374
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Patients with epileptic seizuresElectroencephalogram (EEG) and visual evaluation - Electroencephalogram (EEG) was recorded using Nicolet-One system, and the standard 25-electrode array. Recordings with sharp transients are inspected by experts (physicians).
Receives: Diagnostic Test: Electroencephalogram (EEG) and visual evaluation
Patients with non-epileptic seizuresElectroencephalogram (EEG) and visual evaluation - Electroencephalogram (EEG) was recorded using Nicolet-One system, and the standard 25-electrode array. Recordings with sharp transients are inspected by experts (physicians).
Receives: Diagnostic Test: Electroencephalogram (EEG) and visual evaluation

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Inter-rater Agreement of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN) Criteria (Cut-off=4) in Sensor Space and of Detection of Epileptiform Discharges (EDs) in Source Space

    Inter-rater agreement of IFCN criteria (cut-off=4) in sensor space and of detection of EDs in source space was calculated using Gwet´s Agreemen Coefficient (AC1).

    We calculated Gwet's coefficients of agreement AC1 for beyond chance agreement, because, compared with Cohen's Kappa, the Gwet's agreement coefficient is less affected by prevalence and marginal probability and thereby avoids the problem known as the "paradoxes of kappa". Strength of agreement beyond chance was interpreted according to Landis and Koch criteria: poor (<0), slight (0·01-0·20), fair (0·21-0·40), moderate (0·41-0·60), substantial (0·61-0·80), and almost perfect (0·81-1·00).

    Measured: 1 year

  2. Sensitivity and Specificity IFCN Criteria (Cut-off=4)

    This is a diagnostic study, hence sensitivity and specificity must be calculated from different groups: sensitivity form the group of patients with epilepsy and specificity from the gruoup of patients who do not have epilepsy.

    Sensitivity: the percentage of patients with abnormal index test (true positives) among patients with epilepsy.

    Specificity: the percentage of patients with normal index test (true negatives) among patients who do not have epilepsy.

    Measured: 1 year

  3. The Sensitivity and Specificity of Detecting EDs in Source-space

    This is a diagnostic study, hence sensitivity and specificity must be calculated from different groups: sensitivity form the group of patients with epilepsy and specificity from the group of patients who do not have epilepsy.

    Sensitivity: the percentage of patients with abnormal index test (true positives) among patients with epilepsy.

    Specificity: the percentage of patients with normal index test (true negatives) among patients who do not have epilepsy.

    Measured: 1 year

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted23 May 2018
  2. Study start1 Jan 2012
  3. Primary completion1 Jan 2018
  4. Study completion1 Jan 2018

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Case-control
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrolment
100 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03533374
Sponsor's protocol ID
CIED
Acronym
CIED
Status last verified
Jul 2019
First submitted
11 May 2018
Last updated
22 Jul 2020
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Epilepsy and Non-Epileptic Seizure, run by Sándor Beniczky.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 Jul 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 22 Jul 2020). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Inter-rater Agreement of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN) Criteria (Cut-off=4) in Sensor Space and of Detection of Epileptiform Discharges (EDs) in Source Space (time frame: 1 year). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 Jul 2020.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in