Expanding eligibility for intracranial electroencephalography using Dexmedetomidine Hydrochloride in children with behavioral dyscontrol.

INTRODUCTION: Invasive intracranial electroencephalography (IEEG) is advantageous for identifying epileptogenic foci in pediatric patients with medically intractable epilepsy. Patients with behavioral challenges due to autism, intellectual disabilities, and hyperactivity have greater difficulty tolerating prolonged IEEG recording and risk injuring themselves or others. There is a need for therapies that increase the safety of IEEG but do not interfere with IEEG recording or prolong hospitalization. Dexmedetomidine Hydrochloride's (DH) use has been reported to improve safety in patients with behavioral challenges during routine surface EEG recording but has not been characterized during IEEG. Here we evaluated DH administration in pediatric patients undergoing IEEG to assess its safety and impact on the IEEG recordings. METHODS: A retrospective review identified all pediatric patients undergoing IEEG between January 2016 and September 2022. Patient demographics, DH administration, DH dose, hospital duration, and IEEG seizure data were analyzed. The number of seizures recorded for each patient was divided by the days each patient was monitored with IEEG. The total number of seizures, as well as seizures per day, were compared between DH and non-DH patients via summary statistics, multivariable linear regression, and univariate analysis. Other data were compared across groups with univariate statistics. RESULTS: Eighty-four pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria. Eighteen (21.4 %) received DH treatment during their IEEG recording. There were no statistical differences between the DH and non-DH groups' demographic data, length of hospital stays, or seizure burden. Non-DH patients had a median age of 12.0 years (interquartile range: 7.25-15.00), while DH-receiving patients had a median age of 8.0 years old (interquartile range: 3.00-13.50) (p = 0.07). The non-DH cohort was 57.6 % male, and the DH cohort was 50.0 % male (p = 0.76). The median length of IEEG recordings was 5.0 days (interquartile range: 4.00-6.25) for DH patients versus 6.0 days (interquartile range: 4.00-8.00) for non-DH patients (p = 0.25). Median total seizures recorded in the non-DH group was 8.0 (interquartile range: 5.00-13.25) versus 15.0 in the DH group (interquartile range: 5.00-22.25) (p = 0.33). Median total seizures per day of IEEG monitoring were comparable across groups: 1.50 (interquartile range: 0.65-3.17) for non-DH patients compared to 2.83 (interquartile range: 0.89-4.35) (p = 0.25) for those who received DH. Lastly, non-DH patients were hospitalized for a median of 8.0 days (interquartile range: 6.00-11.25), while DH patients had a median length of stay of 7.00 days (interquartile range: 5.00-8.25) (p = 0.27). No adverse events were reported because of DH administration. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of DH was not associated with adverse events. Additionally, the frequency of seizures captured on the IEEG, as well as the duration of hospitalization, were not significantly different between patients receiving and not receiving DH during IEEG. Incorporating DH into the management of patients with behavioral dyscontrol and intractable epilepsy may expand the use of IEEG to patients who previously could not tolerate it, improve safety, and preserve epileptic activity during the recording period.

Duke Scholars

Author Gerald Arthur Grant Neurosurgery