OBJECT: Language mapping by repetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is increasingly used and has already replaced functional MRI (fMRI) in some institutions for preoperative mapping of neurosurgical patients. Yet some factors affect the concordance of both methods with direct cortical stimulation (DCS), most likely by lesions affecting cortical oxygenation levels. Therefore, the impairment of the accuracy of rTMS and fMRI was analyzed and compared with DCS during awake surgery in patients with intraparenchymal lesions. METHODS: Language mapping was performed by DCS, rTMS, and fMRI using an object-naming task in 27 patients with left-sided perisylvian lesions, and the induced language errors of each method were assigned to the cortical parcellation system. Subsequently, the receiver operating characteristics were calculated for rTMS and fMRI and compared with DCS as ground truth for regions with (w/) and without (w/o) the lesion in the mapped regions. RESULTS: The w/ subgroup revealed a sensitivity of 100% (w/o 100%), a specificity of 8% (w/o 5%), a positive predictive value of 34% (w/o: 53%), and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% (w/o: 100%) for the comparison of rTMS versus DCS. Findings for the comparison of fMRI versus DCS within the w/ subgroup revealed a sensitivity of 32% (w/o: 62%), a specificity of 88% (w/o: 60%), a positive predictive value of 56% (w/o: 62%), and a NPV of 73% (w/o: 60%). CONCLUSIONS: Although strengths and weaknesses exist for both rTMS and fMRI, the results show that rTMS is less affected by a brain lesion than fMRI, especially when performing mapping of language-negative cortical regions based on sensitivity and NPV.
OBJECT: Language mapping by repetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is increasingly used and has already replaced functional MRI (fMRI) in some institutions for preoperative mapping of neurosurgical patients. Yet some factors affect the concordance of both methods with direct cortical stimulation (DCS), most likely by lesions affecting cortical oxygenation levels. Therefore, the impairment of the accuracy of rTMS and fMRI was analyzed and compared with DCS during awake surgery in patients with intraparenchymal lesions. METHODS: Language mapping was performed by DCS, rTMS, and fMRI using an object-naming task in 27 patients with left-sided perisylvian lesions, and the induced language errors of each method were assigned to the cortical parcellation system. Subsequently, the receiver operating characteristics were calculated for rTMS and fMRI and compared with DCS as ground truth for regions with (w/) and without (w/o) the lesion in the mapped regions. RESULTS: The w/ subgroup revealed a sensitivity of 100% (w/o 100%), a specificity of 8% (w/o 5%), a positive predictive value of 34% (w/o: 53%), and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% (w/o: 100%) for the comparison of rTMS versus DCS. Findings for the comparison of fMRI versus DCS within the w/ subgroup revealed a sensitivity of 32% (w/o: 62%), a specificity of 88% (w/o: 60%), a positive predictive value of 56% (w/o: 62%), and a NPV of 73% (w/o: 60%). CONCLUSIONS: Although strengths and weaknesses exist for both rTMS and fMRI, the results show that rTMS is less affected by a brain lesion than fMRI, especially when performing mapping of language-negative cortical regions based on sensitivity and NPV.
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: David G Ellis; Matthew L White; Satoru Hayasaka; David E Warren; Tony W Wilson; Michele R Aizenberg Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 4.047
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: Savannah K Gibbs; Stephen Fulton; Basanagoud Mudigoudar; Frederick A Boop; Shalini Narayana Journal: J Neurosurg Case Lessons Date: 2021-10-04
Authors: Christian F Freyschlag; Sandro M Krieg; Johannes Kerschbaumer; Daniel Pinggera; Marie-Therese Forster; Dominik Cordier; Marco Rossi; Gabriele Miceli; Alexandre Roux; Andrés Reyes; Silvio Sarubbo; Anja Smits; Joanna Sierpowska; Pierre A Robe; Geert-Jan Rutten; Thomas Santarius; Tomasz Matys; Marc Zanello; Fabien Almairac; Lydiane Mondot; Asgeir S Jakola; Maria Zetterling; Adrià Rofes; Gord von Campe; Remy Guillevin; Daniele Bagatto; Vincent Lubrano; Marion Rapp; John Goodden; Philip C De Witt Hamer; Johan Pallud; Lorenzo Bello; Claudius Thomé; Hugues Duffau; Emmanuel Mandonnet Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2018-07-10 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Anna Kelm; Nico Sollmann; Sebastian Ille; Bernhard Meyer; Florian Ringel; Sandro M Krieg Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2017-08-18 Impact factor: 6.244