I Merlet1, J Gotman. 1. Montreal Neurological Institute, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University, 3801 University Street, Montreal, H3A 2B4, Quebec, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In order to evaluate the feasibility of modeling seizures and the reliability of dipole models, we compared source localizations of scalp seizures with the distribution of simultaneous intracerebral electroencephalogram (SEEG). METHODS: In a first session, only scalp electroencephalogram (EEG) was recorded from 15 patients. We averaged the first detectable ictal activity in two consecutive segments of stable topography and morphology. Spatio-temporal dipole sources were estimated for each segment and projected on 3D-magnetic resonance images. In a second session, SEEG was recorded simultaneously with control scalp electrodes, allowing the identification of ictal patterns similar to those submitted to dipole modeling. RESULTS: Ictal discharges could be analyzed in only 6 of 15 patients. In the remaining 9, scalp discharges were undetectable or non-reproducible in 6, and solutions were unstable despite an apparently stable discharge in 3. In the 6 patients successfully modeled, dipoles were found in regions where SEEG discharges were present. However, when intracerebral discharges were very focal, there was no corresponding scalp activity. When intracerebral signals were maximal in the mesial temporal regions at the seizure onset, only lateral neocortical dipoles were found. When discharges reached the frontal lobes, we could identify lateral and mesial frontal sources. CONCLUSIONS: In most seizures, it was not possible to obtain satisfactory dipole models, probably a reflection of the high noise level or widespread generators. When modeling was possible, our results suggested that mesial temporal seizure discharges did not contribute to scalp EEG activity. This activity appears to reflect signals synchronized and distributed over the lateral temporal or frontal neocortex, as well as signals generated in mesial frontal areas.
OBJECTIVE: In order to evaluate the feasibility of modeling seizures and the reliability of dipole models, we compared source localizations of scalp seizures with the distribution of simultaneous intracerebral electroencephalogram (SEEG). METHODS: In a first session, only scalp electroencephalogram (EEG) was recorded from 15 patients. We averaged the first detectable ictal activity in two consecutive segments of stable topography and morphology. Spatio-temporal dipole sources were estimated for each segment and projected on 3D-magnetic resonance images. In a second session, SEEG was recorded simultaneously with control scalp electrodes, allowing the identification of ictal patterns similar to those submitted to dipole modeling. RESULTS: Ictal discharges could be analyzed in only 6 of 15 patients. In the remaining 9, scalp discharges were undetectable or non-reproducible in 6, and solutions were unstable despite an apparently stable discharge in 3. In the 6 patients successfully modeled, dipoles were found in regions where SEEG discharges were present. However, when intracerebral discharges were very focal, there was no corresponding scalp activity. When intracerebral signals were maximal in the mesial temporal regions at the seizure onset, only lateral neocortical dipoles were found. When discharges reached the frontal lobes, we could identify lateral and mesial frontal sources. CONCLUSIONS: In most seizures, it was not possible to obtain satisfactory dipole models, probably a reflection of the high noise level or widespread generators. When modeling was possible, our results suggested that mesial temporal seizure discharges did not contribute to scalp EEG activity. This activity appears to reflect signals synchronized and distributed over the lateral temporal or frontal neocortex, as well as signals generated in mesial frontal areas.
Authors: Yunfeng Lu; Lin Yang; Gregory A Worrell; Benjamin Brinkmann; Cindy Nelson; Bin He Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2012-05-18 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Ivana Despotovic; Perumpillichira J Cherian; Maarten De Vos; Hans Hallez; Wouter Deburchgraeve; Paul Govaert; Maarten Lequin; Gerhard H Visser; Renate M Swarte; Ewout Vansteenkiste; Sabine Van Huffel; Wilfried Philips Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2012-04-21 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Kitti Kaiboriboon; Hans O Lüders; Mehdi Hamaneh; John Turnbull; Samden D Lhatoo Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2012-08-07 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: S Vulliemoz; R Thornton; R Rodionov; D W Carmichael; M Guye; S Lhatoo; A W McEvoy; L Spinelli; C M Michel; J S Duncan; L Lemieux Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2009-07-01 Impact factor: 6.556