A machine-learning algorithm for neonatal seizure recognition: a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial.
Journal
The Lancet. Child & adolescent health
ISSN: 2352-4650
Titre abrégé: Lancet Child Adolesc Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101712925
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2020
10 2020
Historique:
received:
07
04
2020
revised:
19
05
2020
accepted:
03
07
2020
pubmed:
31
8
2020
medline:
3
10
2020
entrez:
31
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Despite the availability of continuous conventional electroencephalography (cEEG), accurate diagnosis of neonatal seizures is challenging in clinical practice. Algorithms for decision support in the recognition of neonatal seizures could improve detection. We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of an automated seizure detection algorithm called Algorithm for Neonatal Seizure Recognition (ANSeR). This multicentre, randomised, two-arm, parallel, controlled trial was done in eight neonatal centres across Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK. Neonates with a corrected gestational age between 36 and 44 weeks with, or at significant risk of, seizures requiring EEG monitoring, received cEEG plus ANSeR linked to the EEG monitor displaying a seizure probability trend in real time (algorithm group) or cEEG monitoring alone (non-algorithm group). The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, and false detection rate) of health-care professionals to identify neonates with electrographic seizures and seizure hours with and without the support of the ANSeR algorithm. Neonates with data on the outcome of interest were included in the analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02431780. Between Feb 13, 2015, and Feb 7, 2017, 132 neonates were randomly assigned to the algorithm group and 132 to the non-algorithm group. Six neonates were excluded (four from the algorithm group and two from the non-algorithm group). Electrographic seizures were present in 32 (25·0%) of 128 neonates in the algorithm group and 38 (29·2%) of 130 neonates in the non-algorithm group. For recognition of neonates with electrographic seizures, sensitivity was 81·3% (95% CI 66·7-93·3) in the algorithm group and 89·5% (78·4-97·5) in the non-algorithm group; specificity was 84·4% (95% CI 76·9-91·0) in the algorithm group and 89·1% (82·5-94·7) in the non-algorithm group; and the false detection rate was 36·6% (95% CI 22·7-52·1) in the algorithm group and 22·7% (11·6-35·9) in the non-algorithm group. We identified 659 h in which seizures occurred (seizure hours): 268 h in the algorithm versus 391 h in the non-algorithm group. The percentage of seizure hours correctly identified was higher in the algorithm group than in the non-algorithm group (177 [66·0%; 95% CI 53·8-77·3] of 268 h vs 177 [45·3%; 34·5-58·3] of 391 h; difference 20·8% [3·6-37·1]). No significant differences were seen in the percentage of neonates with seizures given at least one inappropriate antiseizure medication (37·5% [95% CI 25·0 to 56·3] vs 31·6% [21·1 to 47·4]; difference 5·9% [-14·0 to 26·3]). ANSeR, a machine-learning algorithm, is safe and able to accurately detect neonatal seizures. Although the algorithm did not enhance identification of individual neonates with seizures beyond conventional EEG, recognition of seizure hours was improved with use of ANSeR. The benefit might be greater in less experienced centres, but further study is required. Wellcome Trust, Science Foundation Ireland, and Nihon Kohden.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Despite the availability of continuous conventional electroencephalography (cEEG), accurate diagnosis of neonatal seizures is challenging in clinical practice. Algorithms for decision support in the recognition of neonatal seizures could improve detection. We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of an automated seizure detection algorithm called Algorithm for Neonatal Seizure Recognition (ANSeR).
METHODS
This multicentre, randomised, two-arm, parallel, controlled trial was done in eight neonatal centres across Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK. Neonates with a corrected gestational age between 36 and 44 weeks with, or at significant risk of, seizures requiring EEG monitoring, received cEEG plus ANSeR linked to the EEG monitor displaying a seizure probability trend in real time (algorithm group) or cEEG monitoring alone (non-algorithm group). The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, and false detection rate) of health-care professionals to identify neonates with electrographic seizures and seizure hours with and without the support of the ANSeR algorithm. Neonates with data on the outcome of interest were included in the analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02431780.
FINDINGS
Between Feb 13, 2015, and Feb 7, 2017, 132 neonates were randomly assigned to the algorithm group and 132 to the non-algorithm group. Six neonates were excluded (four from the algorithm group and two from the non-algorithm group). Electrographic seizures were present in 32 (25·0%) of 128 neonates in the algorithm group and 38 (29·2%) of 130 neonates in the non-algorithm group. For recognition of neonates with electrographic seizures, sensitivity was 81·3% (95% CI 66·7-93·3) in the algorithm group and 89·5% (78·4-97·5) in the non-algorithm group; specificity was 84·4% (95% CI 76·9-91·0) in the algorithm group and 89·1% (82·5-94·7) in the non-algorithm group; and the false detection rate was 36·6% (95% CI 22·7-52·1) in the algorithm group and 22·7% (11·6-35·9) in the non-algorithm group. We identified 659 h in which seizures occurred (seizure hours): 268 h in the algorithm versus 391 h in the non-algorithm group. The percentage of seizure hours correctly identified was higher in the algorithm group than in the non-algorithm group (177 [66·0%; 95% CI 53·8-77·3] of 268 h vs 177 [45·3%; 34·5-58·3] of 391 h; difference 20·8% [3·6-37·1]). No significant differences were seen in the percentage of neonates with seizures given at least one inappropriate antiseizure medication (37·5% [95% CI 25·0 to 56·3] vs 31·6% [21·1 to 47·4]; difference 5·9% [-14·0 to 26·3]).
INTERPRETATION
ANSeR, a machine-learning algorithm, is safe and able to accurately detect neonatal seizures. Although the algorithm did not enhance identification of individual neonates with seizures beyond conventional EEG, recognition of seizure hours was improved with use of ANSeR. The benefit might be greater in less experienced centres, but further study is required.
FUNDING
Wellcome Trust, Science Foundation Ireland, and Nihon Kohden.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32861271
pii: S2352-4642(20)30239-X
doi: 10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30239-X
pmc: PMC7492960
pii:
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02431780']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
740-749Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Références
Clin Neurophysiol. 2006 Jun;117(6):1190-203
pubmed: 16621690
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1997 Sep;103(3):363-9
pubmed: 9305283
Epilepsia. 2009 Sep;50(9):2097-101
pubmed: 19490044
J Clin Neurophysiol. 2019 Jan;36(1):9-13
pubmed: 30289769
Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Mar;122(3):474-482
pubmed: 20716492
Neuropediatrics. 2004 Dec;35(6):329-35
pubmed: 15627940
J Clin Neurophysiol. 2016 Oct;33(5):394-402
pubmed: 27749459
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2019 Sep;104(5):F493-F501
pubmed: 30472660
Res Nurs Health. 2014 Apr;37(2):90-7
pubmed: 24403000
J Child Neurol. 2014 Jan;29(1):31-5
pubmed: 23271754
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014 May;99(3):F219-24
pubmed: 24443407
Pediatr Neurol. 2003 Apr;28(4):277-80
pubmed: 12849880
Pediatr Neurol. 1991 Sep-Oct;7(5):363-8
pubmed: 1764139
J Child Neurol. 2013 Mar;28(3):351-64
pubmed: 23318696
Pediatr Res. 2001 Oct;50(4):445-54
pubmed: 11568286
Cleve Clin J Med. 1989;56 Suppl Pt 1:S100-4; discussion S121-3
pubmed: 2655986
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2004 Jan;89(1):F37-40
pubmed: 14711852
J R Soc Interface. 2018 Apr;15(141):
pubmed: 29618526
J Clin Neurophysiol. 2009 Aug;26(4):218-26
pubmed: 19602985
Clin Neurophysiol. 2008 Nov;119(11):2447-54
pubmed: 18824405
J Pediatr. 2009 Jun;154(6):835-41.e1
pubmed: 19230897
Clin Neurophysiol. 2016 Jan;127(1):156-168
pubmed: 26055336
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2016 Dec;58(12):1242-1248
pubmed: 27595841
Int J Neural Syst. 2013 Aug;23(4):1350018
pubmed: 23746291
Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013 Aug;18(4):185-91
pubmed: 23746578
Epilepsia. 1996;37 Suppl 1:S52-9
pubmed: 8647052
Acta Paediatr. 2010 Aug;99(8):1150-5
pubmed: 20353503
Lancet Neurol. 2013 Dec;12(12):1170-9
pubmed: 24229615
J Pediatr. 2009 Sep;155(3):318-23
pubmed: 19540512
ScientificWorldJournal. 2013;2013:769639
pubmed: 23431259
Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015 Jun;20(3):149-53
pubmed: 25660396
Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Aug;122(8):1490-9
pubmed: 21396883
J Pediatr. 2016 Jul;174:98-103.e1
pubmed: 27106855
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1992 Jan;82(1):30-7
pubmed: 1370141
Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2015 Oct 01;2(11):1002-11
pubmed: 26734654
J Hosp Med. 2017 Sep;12(9):760-766
pubmed: 28914284
BMC Pediatr. 2018 May 2;18(1):147
pubmed: 29720158
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2008 May;93(3):F187-91
pubmed: 17626147
Epilepsia. 1987 Sep-Oct;28(5):537-41
pubmed: 3653058
Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Mar;122(3):464-473
pubmed: 20713314