Are All Amplitude-Integrated Electroencephalogram Systems Equal?
Standard
Are All Amplitude-Integrated Electroencephalogram Systems Equal? / Werther, Tobias; Olischar, Monika; Naulaers, Gunnar; Deindl, Philipp; Klebermass-Schrehof, Katrin; Stevenson, Nathan.
In: NEONATOLOGY, Vol. 112, No. 4, 11.2017, p. 394-401.Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Are All Amplitude-Integrated Electroencephalogram Systems Equal?
AU - Werther, Tobias
AU - Olischar, Monika
AU - Naulaers, Gunnar
AU - Deindl, Philipp
AU - Klebermass-Schrehof, Katrin
AU - Stevenson, Nathan
N1 - © 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel.
PY - 2017/11
Y1 - 2017/11
N2 - BACKGROUND: Filter and peak detection algorithms implemented in amplitude-integrated electroencephalogram (aEEG) systems are not standardized. New aEEG systems are continuously enriching the market and clinicians are faced with different aEEG devices whose tracings may vary.OBJECTIVES: The aim of this work was to determine the role of different aEEG systems on quantitative measurements of the aEEG.METHODS: In this observational study, a single-channel aEEG recording (Olympic CFM 6000) with corresponding EEG signal was obtained from 32 infants at a gestational age of 36-44 weeks. The signals were split into 334 episodes of 4 h. New aEEG tracings were generated using the NicoletOne Reader Software and aEEG emulations with varying filter profiles and peak detection settings. The aEEG amplitude margins and automated annotation of continuous normal voltage (CNV) were compared.RESULTS: The output of the Olympic and the NicoletOne systems are very similar but not identical; the Spearman rank correlations of the aEEG amplitude margins exceeded 0.9 and the differences in the lower and upper amplitude margins were 1.55 μV (SD 1.47) and -2.12 μV (SD 1.44) on average (n = 309), respectively. The aEEG emulation showed that the differences between the output of the Olympic and the NicoletOne system could be primarily ascribed to the peak detection algorithm. The differences in output can affect automated analyses with agreement rates in CNV detection of 76% (n = 32, positive) and 92% (n = 32, negative) when comparing the Olympic to the NicoletOne outputs.CONCLUSIONS: Commercial aEEG systems have similar but not identical outputs. Care is advised when interpreting automated aEEG classifications across different devices.
AB - BACKGROUND: Filter and peak detection algorithms implemented in amplitude-integrated electroencephalogram (aEEG) systems are not standardized. New aEEG systems are continuously enriching the market and clinicians are faced with different aEEG devices whose tracings may vary.OBJECTIVES: The aim of this work was to determine the role of different aEEG systems on quantitative measurements of the aEEG.METHODS: In this observational study, a single-channel aEEG recording (Olympic CFM 6000) with corresponding EEG signal was obtained from 32 infants at a gestational age of 36-44 weeks. The signals were split into 334 episodes of 4 h. New aEEG tracings were generated using the NicoletOne Reader Software and aEEG emulations with varying filter profiles and peak detection settings. The aEEG amplitude margins and automated annotation of continuous normal voltage (CNV) were compared.RESULTS: The output of the Olympic and the NicoletOne systems are very similar but not identical; the Spearman rank correlations of the aEEG amplitude margins exceeded 0.9 and the differences in the lower and upper amplitude margins were 1.55 μV (SD 1.47) and -2.12 μV (SD 1.44) on average (n = 309), respectively. The aEEG emulation showed that the differences between the output of the Olympic and the NicoletOne system could be primarily ascribed to the peak detection algorithm. The differences in output can affect automated analyses with agreement rates in CNV detection of 76% (n = 32, positive) and 92% (n = 32, negative) when comparing the Olympic to the NicoletOne outputs.CONCLUSIONS: Commercial aEEG systems have similar but not identical outputs. Care is advised when interpreting automated aEEG classifications across different devices.
KW - Journal Article
U2 - 10.1159/000480008
DO - 10.1159/000480008
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
C2 - 28926828
VL - 112
SP - 394
EP - 401
JO - NEONATOLOGY
JF - NEONATOLOGY
SN - 1661-7800
IS - 4
ER -