论文部分内容阅读
目的：探讨抗癫?药物治疗过程中24 h动态脑电图（AEEG）检查的价值。方法：对187例临床和脑电图（EEG ）确诊为癫?的患者进行正规抗癫?药物治疗，并进行定期复诊和常规 EEG或AEEG检查，随访2年，观察临床疗效和EEG结果。结果：随访第1年、第2年常规EEG结果与临床疗效一致的比例分别为81．5％与85．9％，AEEG结果与临床疗效一致的比例分别为62．1％与70．5％。在临床无发作时，常规EEG结果正常的比例明显高于AEEG常规，而常规EEG结果无改善的比例明显低于AEEG ，两者之间差异有统计学意义（P＜0．01）。在AEEG结果和临床疗效不一致构成中，89．3％～94．5％为临床发作控制或好转，而AEEG结果无改善。结论：AEEG检查可为癫?的临床疗效判断提供客观依据，癫?患者抗癫?药物治疗期间应定期复查24 h AEEG。“,”Objective:To explore the value of 24 hours’ambulatory electroencephalogram(AEEG) monitoring the treatment of epilepsy .Methods:187 patients with epilepsy received clinical and electroen‐cephalogram diagnosis formal antiepileptic drugs therapy .Regular subsequent examinations and AEEG or REEG monitoring were also made during the two years of follow‐up to observe the consistent rate of clin‐ical efficacy and EEG results .Results:The consistent rate of AEEG and clinical curative effect was 62 .1%for the first year’s follow‐up ,70 .5% for the second year ,and REEG was 81 .5% for the first year and 85 .9% for the second ,The proportion of normal REEG results during controlled clinical seizures was much higher than that of AEEG while the proportion of no improved REEG results during controlled clin‐ical seizures was much lower than that of AEEG .They were statistically significant(P<0 .01) .Among the inconsistent of AEEG and clinical efficacy ,89 .3% ~ 94 .5% was clinical seizure controlled or im‐proved while AEEG result was not improved .Conclusion:AEEG monitoring can provide an objective basis in the judging of clinical curative effect of epilepsy .Patients with epilepsy should take regular AEEG mo‐nitoring during the antiepileptic drugs therapy .