OBJECTIVE: The authors evaluated the sensitivity and selectivity of interictal magnetoencephalography (MEG) versus prolonged ictal and interictal scalp video-electroencephalography (V-EEG) in order to identify patient groups that would benefit from preoperative MEG testing. METHODS: The authors evaluated 113 consecutive patients with medically refractory epilepsy who underwent surgery. The epileptogenic region predicted by interictal and ictal V-EEG and MEG was defined in relation to the resected area as perfectly overlapping with the resected area, partially overlapping, or nonoverlapping. RESULTS: The sensitivity of a 30-minute interictal MEG study for detecting clinically significant epileptiform activity was 79.2%. Using MEG, we were able to localize the resected region in a greater proportion of patients (72.3%) than with noninvasive V-EEG (40%). MEG contributed to the localization of the resected region in 58.8% of the patients with a nonlocalizing V-EEG study and 72.8% of the patients for whom V-EEG only partially identified the resected zone. Overall, MEG and V-EEG results were equivalent in 32.3% of the cases, and additional localization information was obtained using MEG in 40% of the patients. CONCLUSION: MEG is most useful for presurgical planning in patients who have either partially or nonlocalizing V-EEG results.
OBJECTIVE: The authors evaluated the sensitivity and selectivity of interictal magnetoencephalography (MEG) versus prolonged ictal and interictal scalp video-electroencephalography (V-EEG) in order to identify patient groups that would benefit from preoperative MEG testing. METHODS: The authors evaluated 113 consecutive patients with medically refractory epilepsy who underwent surgery. The epileptogenic region predicted by interictal and ictal V-EEG and MEG was defined in relation to the resected area as perfectly overlapping with the resected area, partially overlapping, or nonoverlapping. RESULTS: The sensitivity of a 30-minute interictal MEG study for detecting clinically significant epileptiform activity was 79.2%. Using MEG, we were able to localize the resected region in a greater proportion of patients (72.3%) than with noninvasive V-EEG (40%). MEG contributed to the localization of the resected region in 58.8% of the patients with a nonlocalizing V-EEG study and 72.8% of the patients for whom V-EEG only partially identified the resected zone. Overall, MEG and V-EEG results were equivalent in 32.3% of the cases, and additional localization information was obtained using MEG in 40% of the patients. CONCLUSION: MEG is most useful for presurgical planning in patients who have either partially or nonlocalizing V-EEG results.
Authors: E S Schwartz; D J Dlugos; P B Storm; J Dell; R Magee; T P Flynn; D M Zarnow; R A Zimmerman; T P L Roberts Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2008-02-13 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Hiroatsu Murakami; Zhong I Wang; Ahmad Marashly; Balu Krishnan; Richard A Prayson; Yosuke Kakisaka; John C Mosher; Juan Bulacio; Jorge A Gonzalez-Martinez; William E Bingaman; Imad M Najm; Richard C Burgess; Andreas V Alexopoulos Journal: Brain Date: 2016-11-01 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Naoaki Tanaka; Christos Papadelis; Eleonora Tamilia; Michel AlHilani; Joseph R Madsen; Phillip L Pearl; Steven M Stufflebeam Journal: Pediatr Neurol Date: 2018-03-15 Impact factor: 3.372
Authors: Zhong I Wang; Andreas V Alexopoulos; Stephen E Jones; Imad M Najm; Aleksandar Ristic; Chong Wong; Richard Prayson; Felix Schneider; Yosuke Kakisaka; Shuang Wang; William Bingaman; Jorge A Gonzalez-Martinez; Richard C Burgess Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2014-05-16 Impact factor: 10.422