Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Neurocrit Care. 2020 Dec;33(3):646–647. doi: 10.1007/s12028-020-00957-9

Neuromonitoring: No Longer a Spectator Sport

Eric S Rosenthal 1
PMCID: PMC7541539  NIHMSID: NIHMS1582567  PMID: 32253730

Seizure diagnosis is a fundamentally challenging issue in neurocritical care. The vast majority of seizures detected by electroencephalography (EEG) are nonconvulsive,1 yet the yield of scalp EEG is limited without concomitant intracranial recordings.2, 3 Because these intracranial recordings may not be appropriate or feasible in all patients, a variety of imaging modalities have been promulgated as “electro-radiologic” evidence of diagnosing status epilepticus, including diffusion-weighted or perfusion imaging.46 While these imaging modalities may lack specificity, [F-18] Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) hypermetabolism has been a more recent imaging modality demonstrating promise not only because of its regional specificity and dynamic response to anesthetic burst-suppression,7 but due to its dose-dependent metabolic association with spike burden.8

In this issue of Neurocritical Care, Akbik and colleagues9 provide a significant advance on the FDG-PET imaging for status epilepticus by demonstrating that serial assessment of FDG-PET before and during anesthetic burst-suppression may differentiate between status epilepticus and inflammatory conditions such as encephalitis. In the authors’ case series, this “PET sandwich” reveals that FDG-PET hypermetabolism is pharmacologically suppressed by anesthesia when associated with an ictal pathophysiology. Alternatively, FDG-PET hypermetabolism is static, even in the face of burst-suppression, when associated with a non-ictal inflammatory condition.

While utilizing anesthetic burst-suppression for diagnostic intent is not without risk, it represents a continued shift of neuromonitoring away from passive ‘reading” and towards a paradigm of active “pharmacodiagnostic testing.”10 Indeed, the Salzburg EEG criteria for nonconvulsive status epilepticus11 share this predicate that a comprehensive approach to diagnosing nonconvulsive status epilepticus includes assessing the modulatory effect of anti-seizure medication on the EEG.12 While a diagnostic trial of anti-seizure medication may be inconclusive when underlying deficits or a prolonged postictal period obscure a clinical or EEG response, Akbik et al. provide examples in which FDG-PET resolves the potential uncertainty. The “PET sandwich” adds value by serving as a treatment-responsive diagnostic biomarker of ictal hypermetabolism.

No doubt, there are challenges to a new paradigm in which neuromonitoring is “no longer a spectator sport.” Do we broadly give a trial of anti-seizure medication to every patient with periodic or rhythmic patterns on the ictal-interictal continuum? When inconclusive, do we then proceed to a PET sandwich with burst-suppression? Even escalation of anti-seizure medication may have a risk, and the burst-suppression at a minimum requires ventilatory support. Nevertheless, we have evidence from multiple modalities of neuromonitoring that high-frequency periodic discharges are at greatest risk of inducing exhaustive hyperglycolysis,8 hypermetabolism,2 and hypoxia13 of brain parenchyma. Perhaps in this setting, an anti-seizure medication trial should routinely be performed. In other patients, for example with encephalitis, imaging with serial PET during burst suppression may serve as a form of active pharmacodiagnostic testing10 intended to validate treatment response before committing to a prolonged course of therapy with significant inherent risk.

Future studies will need to be performed ascertaining whether non-anesthetic seizure medications can provide similar diagnostic information as anesthetic burst-suppression, and to what degree other neuroimaging or EEG modalities can provide clinical evidence of a meaningful diagnostic response. The current study, as such, is proof of principle that an active approach to seizure diagnosis is an emerging paradigm for precision neurocritical care, drawing lessons from other aspects of neurocritical care, which often require iterative management and reassessment for improved diagnosis and understanding.

Disclosures

E.S.R. receives grant support from the Department of Defense through a subcontract from Moberg ICU Solutions, Inc., and receives financial compensation as a member of the scientific advisory board for UCB Pharmaceuticals and Ceribell, Inc.

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: This Author Accepted Manuscript is a PDF file of an unedited peer-reviewed manuscript that has been accepted for publication but has not been copyedited or corrected. The official version of record that is published in the journal is kept up to date and so may therefore differ from this version.

References

  • 1.Claassen J, Mayer SA, Kowalski RG, Emerson RG, Hirsch LJ. Detection of electrographic seizures with continuous EEG monitoring in critically ill patients. Neurology. 2004. May 25;62(10):1743–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Vespa P, Tubi M, Claassen J, et al. Metabolic crisis occurs with seizures and periodic discharges after brain trauma. Ann Neurol. 2016. April;79(4):579–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Claassen J, Perotte A, Albers D, et al. Nonconvulsive seizures after subarachnoid hemorrhage: Multimodal detection and outcomes. Ann Neurol. 2013. July;74(1):53–64. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Gonzalez-Cuevas M, Coscojuela P, Santamarina E, et al. Usefulness of brain perfusion CT in focal-onset status epilepticus. Epilepsia. 2019. July;60(7):1317–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Milligan TA, Zamani A, Bromfield E. Frequency and patterns of MRI abnormalities due to status epilepticus. Seizure. 2009. Mar;18(2):104–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Shimogawa T, Morioka T, Sayama T, et al. The initial use of arterial spin labeling perfusion and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance images in the diagnosis of nonconvulsive partial status epileptics. Epilepsy Res. 2017. January;129:162–73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Struck AF, Westover MB, Hall LT, Deck GM, Cole AJ, Rosenthal ES. Metabolic Correlates of the Ictal-Interictal Continuum: FDG-PET During Continuous EEG. Neurocrit Care. 2016. June;24(3):324–31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Subramaniam T, Jain A, Hall LT, et al. Lateralized periodic discharges frequency correlates with glucose metabolism. Neurology. 2019. February 12;92(7):e670–e4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Akbik F, M R, A.S D, Singhal T, Lee JW, Vaitkevicius H. The PET Sandwich: Usijng Serial FDG-PET Scans with Interval Burst Suppression to Assess Ictal Components of Disease. Neurocrit Care. 2020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Jorgensen JT, Nielsen KV, Ejlertsen B. Pharmacodiagnostics and targeted therapies - a rational approach for individualizing medical anticancer therapy in breast cancer. Oncologist. 2007. April;12(4):397–405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Leitinger M, Trinka E, Gardella E, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of the Salzburg EEG criteria for nonconvulsive status epilepticus: a retrospective study. Lancet Neurol. 2016. September;15(10):1054–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Leitinger M, Trinka E, Zimmermann G, Beniczky S. Salzburg criteria for nonconvulsive status epilepticus: Details matter. Epilepsia. 2019. November;60(11):2334–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Witsch J, Frey HP, Schmidt JM, et al. Electroencephalographic Periodic Discharges and Frequency-Dependent Brain Tissue Hypoxia in Acute Brain Injury. JAMA Neurol. 2017. March 1;74(3):301–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES