Zulfi Haneef1, Sharon Chiang2. 1. Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; Neurology Care Line, VA Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA. Electronic address: zulfi.haneef@bcm.edu. 2. Department of Statistics, Rice University, Houston, TX, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) is considered a brain network disorder, additionally representing the most common form of pharmaco-resistant epilepsy in adults. There is increasing evidence that seizures in TLE arise from abnormal epileptogenic networks, which extend beyond the clinico-radiologically determined epileptogenic zone and may contribute to the failure rate of 30-50% following epilepsy surgery. Graph theory allows for a network-based representation of TLE brain networks using several neuroimaging and electrophysiologic modalities, and has potential to provide clinicians with clinically useful biomarkers for diagnostic and prognostic purposes. METHODS: We performed a review of the current state of graph theory findings in TLE as they pertain to localization of the epileptogenic zone, prediction of pre- and post-surgical seizure frequency and cognitive performance, and monitoring cognitive decline in TLE. RESULTS: Although different neuroimaging and electrophysiologic modalities have yielded occasionally conflicting results, several potential biomarkers have been characterized for identifying the epileptogenic zone, pre-/post-surgical seizure prediction, and assessing cognitive performance. For localization, graph theory measures of centrality have shown the most potential, including betweenness centrality, outdegree, and graph index complexity, whereas for prediction of seizure frequency, measures of synchronizability have shown the most potential. The utility of clustering coefficient and characteristic path length for assessing cognitive performance in TLE is also discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies integrating data from multiple modalities and testing predictive models are needed to clarify findings and develop graph theory for its clinical utility.
PURPOSE:Temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) is considered a brain network disorder, additionally representing the most common form of pharmaco-resistant epilepsy in adults. There is increasing evidence that seizures in TLE arise from abnormal epileptogenic networks, which extend beyond the clinico-radiologically determined epileptogenic zone and may contribute to the failure rate of 30-50% following epilepsy surgery. Graph theory allows for a network-based representation of TLE brain networks using several neuroimaging and electrophysiologic modalities, and has potential to provide clinicians with clinically useful biomarkers for diagnostic and prognostic purposes. METHODS: We performed a review of the current state of graph theory findings in TLE as they pertain to localization of the epileptogenic zone, prediction of pre- and post-surgical seizure frequency and cognitive performance, and monitoring cognitive decline in TLE. RESULTS: Although different neuroimaging and electrophysiologic modalities have yielded occasionally conflicting results, several potential biomarkers have been characterized for identifying the epileptogenic zone, pre-/post-surgical seizure prediction, and assessing cognitive performance. For localization, graph theory measures of centrality have shown the most potential, including betweenness centrality, outdegree, and graph index complexity, whereas for prediction of seizure frequency, measures of synchronizability have shown the most potential. The utility of clustering coefficient and characteristic path length for assessing cognitive performance in TLE is also discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies integrating data from multiple modalities and testing predictive models are needed to clarify findings and develop graph theory for its clinical utility.
Authors: L Bonilha; C Rorden; J J Halford; M Eckert; S Appenzeller; F Cendes; L M Li Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2006-09-29 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Silvia B Bonelli; Robert H W Powell; Mahinda Yogarajah; Rebecca S Samson; Mark R Symms; Pamela J Thompson; Matthias J Koepp; John S Duncan Journal: Brain Date: 2010-02-15 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: P Krsek; B Maton; P Jayakar; P Dean; B Korman; G Rey; C Dunoyer; E Pacheco-Jacome; G Morrison; J Ragheb; H V Vinters; T Resnick; M Duchowny Journal: Neurology Date: 2008-11-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Danielle S Bassett; Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg; Sophie Achard; Thomas Duke; Edward Bullmore Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-12-11 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ganne Chaitanya; Walter Hinds; James Kragel; Xiaosong He; Noah Sideman; Youssef Ezzyat; Michael R Sperling; Ashwini Sharan; Joseph I Tracy Journal: Neuroscience Date: 2019-11-28 Impact factor: 3.590
Authors: Preya Shah; Danielle S Bassett; Laura E M Wisse; John A Detre; Joel M Stein; Paul A Yushkevich; Russell T Shinohara; Mark A Elliott; Sandhitsu R Das; Kathryn A Davis Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2019-01-21 Impact factor: 5.038