| Literature DB >> 27222796 |
Ilaria Boscolo Galazzo1, Maria Vittoria Mattoli2, Francesca Benedetta Pizzini3, Enrico De Vita4, Anna Barnes5, John S Duncan6, Hans Rolf Jäger7, Xavier Golay4, Jamshed B Bomanji5, Matthias Koepp6, Ashley M Groves5, Francesco Fraioli5.
Abstract
The major challenge in pre-surgical epileptic patient evaluation is the correct identification of the seizure onset area, especially in MR-negative patients. In this study, we aimed to: (1) assess the concordance between perfusion, from ASL, and metabolism, from (18)F-FDG, acquired simultaneously on PET/MR; (2) verify the utility of a statistical approach as supportive diagnostic tool for clinical readers. Secondarily, we compared (18)F-FDG PET data from the hybrid PET/MR system with those acquired with PET/CT, with the purpose of validate the reliability of (18)F-FDG PET/MR data. Twenty patients with refractory focal epilepsy, negative MR and a defined electro-clinical diagnosis underwent PET/MR, immediately followed by PET/CT. Standardized uptake value ratio (SUVr) and cerebral blood flow (CBF) maps were calculated for PET/CT-PET/MR and ASL, respectively. For all techniques, z-score of the asymmetry index (zAI) was applied for depicting significant Right/Left differences. SUVr and CBF images were firstly visually assessed by two neuroimaging readers, who then re-assessed them considering zAI for reaching a final diagnosis. High agreement between (18)F-FDG PET/MR and ASL was found, showing hypometabolism and hypoperfusion in the same hemisphere in 18/20 patients, while the remaining were normal. They were completely concordant in 14/18, concordant in at least one lobe in the remaining. zAI maps improved readers' confidence in 12/20 and 15/20 patients for (18)F-FDG PET/MR and ASL, respectively. (18)F-FDG PET/CT-PET/MR showed high agreement, especially when zAI was considered. The simultaneous metabolism-perfusion acquisition provides excellent concordance on focus lateralisation and good concordance on localisation, determining useful complementary information.Entities:
Keywords: Arterial spin labeling; Cerebral blood flow; Epilepsy; Glucose; Positron emission tomography; Simultaneous PET/MR
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27222796 PMCID: PMC4872676 DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2016.04.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neuroimage Clin ISSN: 2213-1582 Impact factor: 4.881
Clinical profile: gender, age, seizures characteristics, antiepileptic therapy, and electro-clinical diagnosis from the multi-disciplinary team (MDT) established on the basis of clinical information and electrophysiological findings.
| Pt n° | Sex | Age | Years since beginning | Type of seizures | Seizures frequency | Relevant history | Current antiepileptic therapy | MDT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | F | 30 | 20 | Complex partial | 12/month | Negative | CBZ, LEV | Right temporal |
| 2 | F | 28 | 25 | Complex partial | 4–6/day | Negative | LTG, PG, PRP | Right temporo-parietal |
| 3 | F | 40 | 20 | Simple partial with SG | 7/month; 1/year (SG) | Febrile convulsion | CBZ, PG | Right temporal |
| 4 | F | 44 | 30 | Complex partial SG | 3–20/month; 1/year (SG) | Meningitis | LEV | Right temporal |
| 5 | M | 23 | 3 | Simple partial | 1–2/week | Febrile convulsion | ESL | Right parietal |
| 6 | M | 39 | 14 | Simple partial with SG | 1–2/week; rare (SG) | Negative | LTG, LEV, RTG | Left fronto-temporal |
| 7 | F | 39 | 18 | Simple partial with SG | 1–5/daily; rare (SG) | Negative | OCX, CLZ, PHE | Left fronto-temporal |
| 8 | M | 22 | 6 | Complex partial with SG | 6–8/month; 1–3/month (SG) | Negative | ZNS, LEV, CLZ | Left temporo-parietal |
| 9 | M | 19 | 15 | Simple partial with SG | 1–2/week; 1–2/month (SG) | Negative | CLZ, OCX, LEV | Right fronto-temporal |
| 10 | F | 33 | 17 | Complex partial | 1–2/week | Negative | LTG, ZNS | Left temporo-occipital |
| 11 | F | 19 | 5 | Complex partial with SG | 4–5/day; 2–3/week (SG) | Negative | LTG, LEV, ZNS, OCX | Left frontal |
| 12 | M | 23 | 14 | Complex partial | 1/day | Negative | VPA, ESL, TPM, LEV | Left frontal |
| 13 | M | 23 | 19 | Simple partial | 2–3/night | Negative | ZNS, LEV, CLZ | Right frontal |
| 14 | M | 65 | 16 | Complex partial | 1/day | Negative | VPA, LTG | Left temporal |
| 15 | F | 41 | 17 | Complex partial | 2–3/day | Negative | ZNS, ESL, CLZ | Right temporal |
| 16 | M | 31 | 15 | Simple partial with SG | 2/month; rare (SG) | Negative | LEV, LCM | Right temporal |
| 17 | M | 38 | 8 | Complex partial with SG | 1–2/month; rare (SG) | Negative | OCX. CLZ, ZNS, VPA | Left temporal |
| 18 | F | 55 | 49 | Complex partial | 2–3/week | Negative | VPA, CBZ, CLZ, ZNS | Right fronto-temporal |
| 19 | F | 39 | 30 | Complex partial | Several/week | Negative | OCX, TPM, CLP, CLZ | Left temporal |
| 20 | M | 40 | 7 | Complex partial | 3/week | Negative | CBZ, LTG | Right temporal |
SG = secondary generalization; CBZ = carbamazepine; LEV = levetiracetam; LTG = lamotrigine; PG = pregabilin; PRP = parampanel; ESL = eslicarbazepine; RTG = retigabine; OCX = oxocarbazepine;CLZ = clobazam; PHE = phenytoin; ZNS = zonisamide; VPA = valproate; TPM = topiramate; LCM = lacosamide; CLP = clonazepam.
Fig. 118F-FDG PET/CT, 18F-FDG PET/MR, ASL and the corresponding zAI statistical maps for some representative patients with a Right hemisphere focal localisation (normalized data). SUVr and CBF maps for two slices of interest encompassing the presumed focus are reported for 18F-FDG PET and ASL, respectively.
Fig. 218F-FDG PET/CT, 18F-FDG PET/MR, ASL and the corresponding zAI statistical maps for some representative patients with a Left hemisphere focal localisation (normalized data). SUVr and CBF maps for two slices of interest encompassing the presumed focus are reported for 18F-FDG PET and ASL, respectively.
Cross subject Pearson's r correlation (column 1) and t-test results (column 2 and 3) between SUVr of 18F-FDG PET/CT and SUVr of 18F-FDG PET/MR in 10 regions of interest.
| Region of interest | Correlation | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Frontal | 0.85 | 2.01 | 0.051 |
| Temporal | 0.89 | 1.48 | 0.147 |
| Occipital | 0.68 | 2.53 | 0.015 |
| Parietal | 0.72 | 2.30 | 0.027 |
| Cerebellum | 0.94 | 0.63 | 0.530 |
| Striata | 0.83 | − 1.34 | 0.195 |
| Thalamus | 0.82 | − 4.18 | 0.002 |
| Hippocampus | 0.80 | − 6.24 | 0.000 |
| Insula | 0.93 | − 0.26 | 0.935 |
| Precuneus | 0.80 | 1.10 | 0.280 |
p-Value for Pearson's r correlation coefficient was < 0.0005 in each region
18F-FDG PET/MR and ASL results: visual assessment, final decision after zAI consultation (visual + zAI) and readers' confidence in their decision after image reassessment with zAI information. The electro-clinical diagnosis about focus localisation from the multi-disciplinary team (MDT) is also reported.
| Pt n° | MDT | 18F-FDG PET/MR visual | 18F-FDG PET/MR visual + zAI | Readers' confidence after zAI maps | ASL visual | ASL visual + zAI | Readers' confidence after zAI maps |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Right temporal | Right temporal | Right temporal | Unchanged | Right temporal | Right temporal | Unchanged |
| 2 | Right temporo-parietal | Normal | Normal | – | Normal | Normal | – |
| 3 | Right temporal | Right temporal | Right temporal | Improved | Right temporal | Right temporal | Improved |
| 4 | Right temporal | Normal | Right temporal | Improved (*) | Normal | Right temporal | Improved (*) |
| 5 | Right parietal | Normal | Normal | – | Normal | Normal | – |
| 6 | Left fronto-temporal | Left temporal | Left temporal | Unchanged | Left temporal | Left temporal | Unchanged |
| 7 | Left fronto-temporal | Left temporal | Left temporal | Improved | Left temporal | Left fronto-temporal | Improved (*) |
| 8 | Left temporo-parietal | Left temporal | Left temporo-parietal | Improved (*) | Left fronto-parietal | Left fronto-parietal | Improved |
| 9 | Right fronto-temporal | Right fronto-temporal | Right Fronto-Temporal | Improved | Right fronto-temporal | Right fronto-temporal | Improved |
| 10 | Left temporo-occipital | Left temporo-occipital | Left temporo-occipital | Unchanged | Left temporo-occipital | Left temporo-occipital | Improved |
| 11 | Left frontal | Left frontal | Left frontal | Unchanged | Left fronto-parietal | Left fronto-parietal | Improved |
| 12 | Left frontal | Left frontal | Left frontal | Unchanged | Left fronto-parietal | Left fronto-parietal | Improved |
| 13 | Right frontal | Right frontal | Right frontal | Unchanged | Right frontal | Right frontal | Unchanged |
| 14 | Left temporal | Left fronto-temporal | Left fronto-temporal | Improved | Left fronto-temporal | Left fronto-temporal | Improved |
| 15 | Right temporal | Right temporal | Right temporal | Improved | Right temporal | Right temporal | Improved |
| 16 | Right temporal | Right temporal | Right temporal | Improved | Right temporal | Right temporal | Improved |
| 17 | Left temporal | Left temporal | Left temporal | Improved | Left temporal | Left temporal | Improved |
| 18 | Right fronto-temporal | Right fronto-temporal | Right fronto-temporal | Improved | Right fronto-temporal | Right fronto-temporal | Improved |
| 19 | Left temporal | Left temporal | Left temporal | Improved | Left temporal | Left temporal | Improved |
| 20 | Right temporal | Right temporal | Right temporal | Improved | Right temporal | Right temporal | Improved |
(*) Readers confidence has been highly improved by the zAI consultation (i.e. they changed their initial judgment)
Cross subject Spearman's rs correlation (column 1 and 2) and Wilcoxon signed-ranks test results (column 3 and 4) between SUVr and rCBF values in 10 regions of interest.
| Region of interest | Correlation | Wilcoxon test | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frontal | 0.64 | 0.021 | − 1.87 | 0.080 |
| Temporal | 0.58 | 0.042 | − 1.42 | 0.128 |
| Occipital | 0.49 | 0.101 | − 2.55 | 0.011 |
| Parietal | 0.54 | 0.049 | − 3.04 | 0.002 |
| Cerebellum | 0.28 | 0.353 | − 1.93 | 0.057 |
| Striata | 0.59 | 0.040 | − 2.90 | 0.004 |
| Thalamus | 0.27 | 0.363 | − 2.69 | 0.007 |
| Hippocampus | 0.55 | 0.045 | − 1.57 | 0.120 |
| Insula | 0.21 | 0.475 | − 1.55 | 0.120 |
| Precuneus | 0.46 | 0.115 | − 2.76 | 0.006 |
Fig. 3Regional comparison across the twenty patients for ten regions of interest. A) 18F-FDG PET/CT vs 18F-FDG PET/MR; B) ASL vs 18F-FDG PET/MR.