. 2009 Sep 10;132(11):3047–3059. doi: 10.1093/brain/awp222

Table 2.

Features associated with HFOs

Patient	Sample	Macro- discharge rate/min	Micro- discharge rate/min	Percentage of HFOs associated with µEEG features			Percentage of macro- discharges	Percentage of micro- discharges	Percentage of HFOs with increased MUA		Percentage of LS-HFOEs with macro-
				Macro	Micro	ND	with HFO	with HFO	R	FR	discharges
1	Wake	0	0	–	–	100	–	–	0	100	–
	Sleep	0	0	–	–	100	–	–	0	100	–
2	Wake	5.2	4.4	62	5	33	81	8	2	97	88
	Sleep	10.5	4.5	63	0	37	51	0	0	90	100
3	Wake	76	48	51	8	41	12	3	0	98	100
	Sleep	52.8	90	33	4	63	11	0.8	1	98	51
4	Wake	9.0	7.0	53	6	41	28	3.4	3	94	100
	Sleep	9.0	3.2	33	5	61	18	3.0	2	82	39
Average				49^a	5^a	46^a	33^a	3.0^a	1	95	80^a

Data are shown for each patient's recording samples (wake and NREM sleep). The percentages of HFOs associated with macrodischarges (‘Macro’), associated with microdischarges (‘Micro’) or occurring in isolation (‘ND’) are given. As Patient 1's recording contained no macro- or microdischarges at the MEA site, all HFOs are classed as ND, and no percentage calculations pertaining to these µEEG features were performed. The rates of macrodischarge and microdischarge detections in each recording sample are shown, along with the proportions of each discharge type that were associated with HFOs. While significant variation was present, macrodischarges were significantly more likely to be associated with HFOs than microdischarges (Student's t-test, P < 0.05). Large-scale HFOEs (LS-HFOE) were strongly associated with macrodischarges (40%–100%, mean 79%). Fast ripples were strongly associated with multiunit spiking, while the opposite was true of ripples.

a Averaged from Patients 2–4 only.