论文部分内容阅读
方法:312例患者分成3组:A组症状性癫(疒间)28例,B组原发性癫(疒间)234例,C组发作性症状50例。作AEEG与REEG对比分析。结果:A组(疒间)样放电,局灶性异常率AEEG分别为67.68%,78.57%高于REEG28.57%,39.29%。B组(疒间)样放电,局灶异常AEEG分别为67.52%,64.96%也明显高于REEG29.06%,35.47%。C组局灶异常AEEG36%高于REEG16%。在AEEG监测过程中,10例有临床发作。B组158例AEEG有(疒间)样放电,122例(65.59%)出现于睡眠中,其中114例次(93.44%)在NREM Ⅰ,Ⅱ期。结论:AEEG能提高癫(疒间)确诊率。
Methods: 312 patients were divided into 3 groups: 28 cases of symptomatic epilepsy (group A), 234 cases of group B (epistaxis) and 50 cases of group C (group C). For AEEG and REEG comparative analysis. Results: In group A, the AEEG of focal abnormality was 67.68%, 78.57% higher than that of REEG, and the rate of AEEG was 28.57%, 39.29% respectively. In group B, the AEEG of focal abnormalities were 67.52% and 64.96% respectively, which was significantly higher than that of REEG (29.06% and 35.47%). CEG group abnormal AEEG36% higher than REEG16%. During the AEEG surveillance, 10 patients had a clinical seizure. In group B, 158 cases of AEEG had intracranial discharge, and 122 cases (65.59%) appeared in sleep, of which 114 cases (93.44%) were in NREM stage Ⅰ and Ⅱ. Conclusion: AEEG can improve the diagnosis rate of epilepsy.