The Commission on Classification and Terminology and the Commission on Epidemiology of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) have charged a Task Force to revise concepts, definition, and classification of status epilepticus (SE). The proposed new definition of SE is as follows: Status epilepticus is a condition resulting either from the failure of the mechanisms responsible for seizure termination or from the initiation of mechanisms, which lead to abnormally, prolonged seizures (after time point t1 ). It is a condition, which can have long-term consequences (after time point t2 ), including neuronal death, neuronal injury, and alteration of neuronal networks, depending on the type and duration of seizures. This definition is conceptual, with two operational dimensions: the first is the length of the seizure and the time point (t1 ) beyond which the seizure should be regarded as "continuous seizure activity." The second time point (t2 ) is the time of ongoing seizure activity after which there is a risk of long-term consequences. In the case of convulsive (tonic-clonic) SE, both time points (t1 at 5 min and t2 at 30 min) are based on animal experiments and clinical research. This evidence is incomplete, and there is furthermore considerable variation, so these time points should be considered as the best estimates currently available. Data are not yet available for other forms of SE, but as knowledge and understanding increase, time points can be defined for specific forms of SE based on scientific evidence and incorporated into the definition, without changing the underlying concepts. A new diagnostic classification system of SE is proposed, which will provide a framework for clinical diagnosis, investigation, and therapeutic approaches for each patient. There are four axes: (1) semiology; (2) etiology; (3) electroencephalography (EEG) correlates; and (4) age. Axis 1 (semiology) lists different forms of SE divided into those with prominent motor systems, those without prominent motor systems, and currently indeterminate conditions (such as acute confusional states with epileptiform EEG patterns). Axis 2 (etiology) is divided into subcategories of known and unknown causes. Axis 3 (EEG correlates) adopts the latest recommendations by consensus panels to use the following descriptors for the EEG: name of pattern, morphology, location, time-related features, modulation, and effect of intervention. Finally, axis 4 divides age groups into neonatal, infancy, childhood, adolescent and adulthood, and elderly.

Our data show that TH may modify outcome prediction after CA, implying that some clinical features should be interpreted with more caution in this setting as compared with the AAN guidelines. EEG background reactivity is useful in determining the prognosis after CA treated with TH.

We convened an international group of experts to standardize definitions of New-Onset Refractory Status Epilepticus (NORSE), Febrile Infection-Related Epilepsy Syndrome (FIRES), and related conditions. This was done to enable improved communication for investigators, physicians, families, patients, and other caregivers. Consensus definitions were achieved via email messages, phone calls, an in-person consensus conference, and collaborative manuscript preparation. Panel members were from 8 countries and included adult and pediatric experts in epilepsy, electroencephalography (EEG), and neurocritical care. The proposed consensus definitions are as follows: NORSE is a clinical presentation, not a specific diagnosis, in a patient without active epilepsy or other preexisting relevant neurological disorder, with new onset of refractory status epilepticus without a clear acute or active structural, toxic or metabolic cause. FIRES is a subcategory of NORSE, applicable for all ages, that requires a prior febrile infection starting between 2 weeks and 24 hours prior to onset of refractory status epilepticus, with or without fever at onset of status epilepticus. Proposed consensus definitions are also provided for Infantile Hemiconvulsion-Hemiplegia and Epilepsy syndrome (IHHE) and for prolonged, refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus. This document has been endorsed by the Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium. We hope these consensus definitions will promote improved communication, permit multicenter research, and ultimately improve understanding and treatment of these conditions.

Objective:To identify reliable predictors of outcome in comatose patients after cardiac arrest using a single routine EEG and standardized interpretation according to the terminology proposed by the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society.Methods:In this cohort study, 4 EEG specialists, blinded to outcome, evaluated prospectively recorded EEGs in the Target Temperature Management trial (TTM trial) that randomized patients to 33°C vs 36°C. Routine EEG was performed in patients still comatose after rewarming. EEGs were classified into highly malignant (suppression, suppression with periodic discharges, burst-suppression), malignant (periodic or rhythmic patterns, pathological or nonreactive background), and benign EEG (absence of malignant features). Poor outcome was defined as best Cerebral Performance Category score 3–5 until 180 days.Results:Eight TTM sites randomized 202 patients. EEGs were recorded in 103 patients at a median 77 hours after cardiac arrest; 37% had a highly malignant EEG and all had a poor outcome (specificity 100%, sensitivity 50%). Any malignant EEG feature had a low specificity to predict poor prognosis (48%) but if 2 malignant EEG features were present specificity increased to 96% (p < 0.001). Specificity and sensitivity were not significantly affected by targeted temperature or sedation. A benign EEG was found in 1% of the patients with a poor outcome.Conclusions:Highly malignant EEG after rewarming reliably predicted poor outcome in half of patients without false predictions. An isolated finding of a single malignant feature did not predict poor outcome whereas a benign EEG was highly predictive of a good outcome.

patients with DoC. The state of consciousness should be classified according to the highest level revealed by any of these three approaches. RESULTS Clinical examinationPICO questions 1-3 refer to clinical signs, PICO questions 4-8 to clinical rating scales. Thirteen