PURPOSE: To provide a more detailed investigation of hippocampal subfields using 7T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the identification of hippocampal sclerosis in temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 13) with drug-resistant TLE previously identified by conventional imaging as having hippocampal sclerosis (HS) or not (nine without HS, four HS) and 20 age-matched healthy controls were scanned and compared using a 7T MRI protocol. Using a manual segmentation scheme to delineate hippocampal subfields, subfield-specific volume changes and apparent transverse relaxation rate ( R2*) were studied between the two groups. In addition, qualitative assessment at 7T and clinical outcomes were correlated with measured subfield changes. RESULTS: Volumetry of the hippocampus at 7T in HS patients revealed significant ipsilateral subfield atrophy in CA1 (P = 0.001) and CA4+DG (P < 0.001). Volumetry also uncovered subfield atrophy in 33% of patients without HS, which had not been detected using conventional imaging. R2* was significantly lower in the CA4+DG subfields (P = 0.001) and the whole hippocampus (P = 0.029) of HS patients compared to controls but not significantly lower than the group without HS (P = 0.077, P = 0.109). No correlation was found between quantitative volumetry and qualitative assessment as well as surgical outcomes (Sub, P = 0.495, P = 0.567, P = 0.528; CA1, P = 0.104 ± 0.171, P = 0.273, P = 0.554; CA2+CA3, P = 0.517, P = 0.952, P = 0.130 ± 0.256; CA4+DG, P = 0.052 ± 0.173, P = 0.212, P = 0.124 ± 0.204; WholeHipp, P = 0.187, P = 0.132 ± 0.197, P = 0.628). CONCLUSION: These preliminary findings indicate that hippocampal subfield volumetry assessed at 7T is capable of identifying characteristic patterns of hippocampal atrophy in HS patients; however, difficulty remains in using imaging to identify hippocampal pathologies in cases without HS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;45:1359-1370.
PURPOSE: To provide a more detailed investigation of hippocampal subfields using 7T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the identification of hippocampal sclerosis in temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE). MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients (n = 13) with drug-resistant TLE previously identified by conventional imaging as having hippocampal sclerosis (HS) or not (nine without HS, four HS) and 20 age-matched healthy controls were scanned and compared using a 7T MRI protocol. Using a manual segmentation scheme to delineate hippocampal subfields, subfield-specific volume changes and apparent transverse relaxation rate ( R2*) were studied between the two groups. In addition, qualitative assessment at 7T and clinical outcomes were correlated with measured subfield changes. RESULTS: Volumetry of the hippocampus at 7T in HS patients revealed significant ipsilateral subfield atrophy in CA1 (P = 0.001) and CA4+DG (P < 0.001). Volumetry also uncovered subfield atrophy in 33% of patients without HS, which had not been detected using conventional imaging. R2* was significantly lower in the CA4+DG subfields (P = 0.001) and the whole hippocampus (P = 0.029) of HS patients compared to controls but not significantly lower than the group without HS (P = 0.077, P = 0.109). No correlation was found between quantitative volumetry and qualitative assessment as well as surgical outcomes (Sub, P = 0.495, P = 0.567, P = 0.528; CA1, P = 0.104 ± 0.171, P = 0.273, P = 0.554; CA2+CA3, P = 0.517, P = 0.952, P = 0.130 ± 0.256; CA4+DG, P = 0.052 ± 0.173, P = 0.212, P = 0.124 ± 0.204; WholeHipp, P = 0.187, P = 0.132 ± 0.197, P = 0.628). CONCLUSION: These preliminary findings indicate that hippocampal subfield volumetry assessed at 7T is capable of identifying characteristic patterns of hippocampal atrophy in HS patients; however, difficulty remains in using imaging to identify hippocampal pathologies in cases without HS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;45:1359-1370.
Authors: Elke Hattingen; Simon Jonas Enkirch; Alina Jurcoane; Maximilian Kruse; Daniel Delev; Alexander Grote; Albert Becker Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2017-10-30 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Phillip DiGiacomo; Julian Maclaren; Murat Aksoy; Elizabeth Tong; Mackenzie Carlson; Bryan Lanzman; Syed Hashmi; Ronald Watkins; Jarrett Rosenberg; Brian Burns; Timothy W Skloss; Dan Rettmann; Brian Rutt; Roland Bammer; Michael Zeineh Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-02-20 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Laura E M Wisse; Ana M Daugherty; Rosanna K Olsen; David Berron; Valerie A Carr; Craig E L Stark; Robert S C Amaral; Katrin Amunts; Jean C Augustinack; Andrew R Bender; Jeffrey D Bernstein; Marina Boccardi; Martina Bocchetta; Alison Burggren; M Mallar Chakravarty; Marie Chupin; Arne Ekstrom; Robin de Flores; Ricardo Insausti; Prabesh Kanel; Olga Kedo; Kristen M Kennedy; Geoffrey A Kerchner; Karen F LaRocque; Xiuwen Liu; Anne Maass; Nicolai Malykhin; Susanne G Mueller; Noa Ofen; Daniela J Palombo; Mansi B Parekh; John B Pluta; Jens C Pruessner; Naftali Raz; Karen M Rodrigue; Dorothee Schoemaker; Andrea T Shafer; Trevor A Steve; Nanthia Suthana; Lei Wang; Julie L Winterburn; Michael A Yassa; Paul A Yushkevich; Renaud la Joie Journal: Hippocampus Date: 2016-11-15 Impact factor: 3.899
Authors: Joseph I Tracy; Kapil Chaudhary; Shilpi Modi; Andrew Crow; Ashith Kumar; David Weinstein; Michael R Sperling Journal: Brain Commun Date: 2021-03-10