BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Brain tumors affecting language-relevant areas may influence language lateralization. The purpose of this study was to systematically investigate language lateralization in brain tumor patients using clinical language fMRI, comparing the results with a group of healthy volunteers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-seven strictly right-handed patients with left-hemispheric-space intracranial masses (mainly neoplastic) affecting either the Broca area (n = 19) or Wernicke area (n = 38) were prospectively enrolled in this study. Fourteen healthy volunteers served as a control group. Standardized clinical language fMRI, using visually triggered sentence- and word-generation paradigms, was performed on a 1.5T MR scanner. Semiautomated analyses of all functional data were conducted on an individual basis using BrainVoyager. A regional lateralization index was calculated for Broca and Wernicke areas separately versus their corresponding right-hemisphere homologs. RESULTS: In masses affecting the Broca area, a significant decrease in the lateralization index was found when performing word generation (P = .0017), whereas when applying sentence generation, the decrease did not reach statistical significance (P = .851). Masses affecting the Wernicke area induced a significant decrease of the lateralization index when performing sentence generation (P = .0007), whereas when applying word generation, the decrease was not statistically significant (P = .310). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical language fMRI was feasible for patients with brain tumors and provided relevant presurgical information by localizing essential language areas and determining language dominance. A significant effect of the brain masses on language lateralization was observed, with a shift toward the contralesional, nondominant hemisphere. This may reflect compensatory mechanisms of the brain to maintain communicative abilities.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Brain tumors affecting language-relevant areas may influence language lateralization. The purpose of this study was to systematically investigate language lateralization in brain tumorpatients using clinical language fMRI, comparing the results with a group of healthy volunteers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-seven strictly right-handed patients with left-hemispheric-space intracranial masses (mainly neoplastic) affecting either the Broca area (n = 19) or Wernicke area (n = 38) were prospectively enrolled in this study. Fourteen healthy volunteers served as a control group. Standardized clinical language fMRI, using visually triggered sentence- and word-generation paradigms, was performed on a 1.5T MR scanner. Semiautomated analyses of all functional data were conducted on an individual basis using BrainVoyager. A regional lateralization index was calculated for Broca and Wernicke areas separately versus their corresponding right-hemisphere homologs. RESULTS: In masses affecting the Broca area, a significant decrease in the lateralization index was found when performing word generation (P = .0017), whereas when applying sentence generation, the decrease did not reach statistical significance (P = .851). Masses affecting the Wernicke area induced a significant decrease of the lateralization index when performing sentence generation (P = .0007), whereas when applying word generation, the decrease was not statistically significant (P = .310). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical language fMRI was feasible for patients with brain tumors and provided relevant presurgical information by localizing essential language areas and determining language dominance. A significant effect of the brain masses on language lateralization was observed, with a shift toward the contralesional, nondominant hemisphere. This may reflect compensatory mechanisms of the brain to maintain communicative abilities.
Authors: F Z Yetkin; S Swanson; M Fischer; G Akansel; G Morris; W Mueller; V Haughton Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1998 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Marion Smits; Evy Visch-Brink; Caroline K Schraa-Tam; Peter J Koudstaal; Aad van der Lugt Journal: Radiographics Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: C Weiller; C Isensee; M Rijntjes; W Huber; S Müller; D Bier; K Dutschka; R P Woods; J Noth; H C Diener Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 1995-06 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: H J Rosen; S E Petersen; M R Linenweber; A Z Snyder; D A White; L Chapman; A W Dromerick; J A Fiez; M D Corbetta Journal: Neurology Date: 2000-12-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: J Mbwana; M M Berl; E K Ritzl; L Rosenberger; J Mayo; S Weinstein; J A Conry; P L Pearl; S Shamim; E N Moore; S Sato; L G Vezina; W H Theodore; W D Gaillard Journal: Brain Date: 2008-12-05 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Christoph Stippich; Nora Rapps; Jens Dreyhaupt; Anita Durst; Bodo Kress; Ernst Nennig; Volker M Tronnier; Klaus Sartor Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Anthony J Tyndall; Julia Reinhardt; Volker Tronnier; Luigi Mariani; Christoph Stippich Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-05-19 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Bornali Kundu; Amy Penwarden; Joel M Wood; Thomas A Gallagher; Matthew J Andreoli; Jed Voss; Timothy Meier; Veena A Nair; John S Kuo; Aaron S Field; Chad Moritz; M Elizabeth Meyerand; Vivek Prabhakaran Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Prashin Unadkat; Luca Fumagalli; Laura Rigolo; Mark G Vangel; Geoffrey S Young; Raymond Huang; Srinivasan Mukundan; Alexandra Golby; Yanmei Tie Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: M Avramescu-Murphy; E Hattingen; M-T Forster; A Oszvald; S Anti; S Frisch; M O Russ; A Jurcoane Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2016-01-05 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Jian W Dong; Nicole M Petrovich Brennan; Giana Izzo; Kyung K Peck; Andrei I Holodny Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2016-02-05 Impact factor: 2.804