M Genetti1, R Tyrand1, F Grouiller2, A M Lascano3, S Vulliemoz3, L Spinelli3, M Seeck3, K Schaller4, C M Michel5. 1. Department of Neurology and Fundamental Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland. 2. Department of Radiology and Medical Informatics, Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland. 3. Department of Neurology, Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland. 5. Department of Neurology and Fundamental Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland. Electronic address: christoph.michel@unige.ch.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the contribution of electrocortical stimulation (ECS), induced high gamma electrocorticography (hgECoG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) for the localization of somatosensory and language cortex. METHODS:23 Epileptic patients with subdural electrodes underwent a protocol of somatosensory stimulation and/or an auditory semantic decision task. 14 Patients did the same protocol with fMRI prior to implantation. RESULTS:ECS resulted in the identification of thumb somatosensory cortex in 12/16 patients. Taking ECS as a gold standard, hgECoG and fMRI identified 53.6/33% of true positive and 4/12% of false positive contacts, respectively. The hgECoG false positive sites were all found in the hand area of the post-central gyrus. ECS localized language-related sites in 7/12 patients with hgECoG and fMRI showing 50/64% of true positive and 8/23% of false positive contacts, respectively. All but one of the hgECoG/fMRI false positive contacts were located in plausible language areas. Four patients showed post-surgical impairments: the resection included the sites positively indicated by ECS, hgECoG and fMRI in 3 patients and a positive hgECoG site in one patient. CONCLUSIONS:HgECoG and fMRI provide additional localization information in patients who cannot sufficiently collaborate during ECS. SIGNIFICANCE: HgECoG and fMRI make the cortical mapping procedure more flexible not only by identifying priority cortical sites for ECS or when ECS is not feasible, but also when ECS does not provide any result.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the contribution of electrocortical stimulation (ECS), induced high gamma electrocorticography (hgECoG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) for the localization of somatosensory and language cortex. METHODS: 23 Epilepticpatients with subdural electrodes underwent a protocol of somatosensory stimulation and/or an auditory semantic decision task. 14 Patients did the same protocol with fMRI prior to implantation. RESULTS: ECS resulted in the identification of thumb somatosensory cortex in 12/16 patients. Taking ECS as a gold standard, hgECoG and fMRI identified 53.6/33% of true positive and 4/12% of false positive contacts, respectively. The hgECoG false positive sites were all found in the hand area of the post-central gyrus. ECS localized language-related sites in 7/12 patients with hgECoG and fMRI showing 50/64% of true positive and 8/23% of false positive contacts, respectively. All but one of the hgECoG/fMRI false positive contacts were located in plausible language areas. Four patients showed post-surgical impairments: the resection included the sites positively indicated by ECS, hgECoG and fMRI in 3 patients and a positive hgECoG site in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: HgECoG and fMRI provide additional localization information in patients who cannot sufficiently collaborate during ECS. SIGNIFICANCE: HgECoG and fMRI make the cortical mapping procedure more flexible not only by identifying priority cortical sites for ECS or when ECS is not feasible, but also when ECS does not provide any result.
Authors: Rachel Rolinski; Alison Austermuehle; Edythe Wiggs; Shubhi Agrawal; Leigh N Sepeta; William D Gaillard; Kareem A Zaghloul; Sara K Inati; William H Theodore Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2019-02-11 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Alison Austermuehle; John Cocjin; Richard Reynolds; Shubhi Agrawal; Leigh Sepeta; William D Gaillard; Kareem A Zaghloul; Sara Inati; William H Theodore Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2017-03-22 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: J R Swift; W G Coon; C Guger; P Brunner; M Bunch; T Lynch; B Frawley; A L Ritaccio; G Schalk Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 3.708