Serge Desarnaud1,2, Charles Mellerio3, Franck Semah4,5, Agathe Laurent6, Elisabeth Landre6,7, Bertrand Devaux6,7, Catherine Chiron1,8,9, Vincent Lebon1, Francine Chassoux10,11,12,13,14. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, SHFJ-CEA, 91401, Orsay, France. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, 75013, Paris, France. 3. Department of Neuro-Imaging, Sainte-Anne Hospital, 75014, Paris, France. 4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, CHU Lille, 59000, Lille, France. 5. INSERM U 1171, Lille, France. 6. Department of Neurosurgery, Sainte-Anne Hospital, 1, rue Cabanis, 75014, Paris, France. 7. University Paris-Descartes, 75005, Paris, France. 8. INSERM U 1129, 75015, Paris, France. 9. CEA, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France. 10. Department of Nuclear Medicine, SHFJ-CEA, 91401, Orsay, France. f.chassoux@ch-sainte-anne.fr. 11. Department of Neurosurgery, Sainte-Anne Hospital, 1, rue Cabanis, 75014, Paris, France. f.chassoux@ch-sainte-anne.fr. 12. University Paris-Descartes, 75005, Paris, France. f.chassoux@ch-sainte-anne.fr. 13. CEA, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France. f.chassoux@ch-sainte-anne.fr. 14. INSERM U1023, CEA, Paris-Sud University, 91401, Orsay, France. f.chassoux@ch-sainte-anne.fr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the localizing value of 18F-FDG PET in patients operated on for drug-resistant epilepsy due to focal cortical dysplasia type 2 (FCD2). METHODS: We analysed 18F-FDG PET scans from 103 consecutive patients (52 males, 7-65 years old) with histologically proven FCD2. PET and MRI data were first reviewed by visual analysis blinded to clinical information and FCD2 location. The additional value of electroclinical data and PET/MRI coregistration was assessed by comparison with pathological results and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Visual analysis of PET scans showed focal or regional hypometabolism corresponding to the FCD2 in 45 patients (44%), but the findings were doubtful or misleading in 37 patients and negative in 21. When considering electroclinical data, positive localization was obtained in 73 patients, and this increased to 85 (83%) after coregistration of PET and MRI data. Under the same conditions, MRI was positive in 61 patients (59%), doubtful in 15 and negative in 27. The additional value of PET was predominant in patients negative or doubtful on MRI, localizing the FCD2 in 35 patients (83%). Interobserver agreement correlated with the grade of hypometabolism: it was good in patients with mild to severe hypometabolism (82-95%), but moderate in those with subtle/doubtful hypometabolism (45%). The main factors influencing positive PET localization were the grade of hypometabolism and the size of the FCD2 (P < 0.0001). Misleading location (nine patients) was associated with a small FCD2 in the mesial frontal and central regions. Following limited cortical resection mainly located in extratemporal areas (mean follow-up 5.6 years), a seizure-free outcome was achieved in 94% of patients, including Engel's class IA in 72%. CONCLUSION: In this series, 18F-FDG PET contributed to the localization of FCD2 in 83% of patients. This high localizing value was obtained by integration of electroclinical data and PET/MRI coregistration. This approach may help improve the surgical outcome in extratemporal epilepsy, even in patients negative on MRI.
PURPOSE: To assess the localizing value of 18F-FDG PET in patients operated on for drug-resistant epilepsy due to focal cortical dysplasia type 2 (FCD2). METHODS: We analysed 18F-FDG PET scans from 103 consecutive patients (52 males, 7-65 years old) with histologically proven FCD2. PET and MRI data were first reviewed by visual analysis blinded to clinical information and FCD2 location. The additional value of electroclinical data and PET/MRI coregistration was assessed by comparison with pathological results and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Visual analysis of PET scans showed focal or regional hypometabolism corresponding to the FCD2 in 45 patients (44%), but the findings were doubtful or misleading in 37 patients and negative in 21. When considering electroclinical data, positive localization was obtained in 73 patients, and this increased to 85 (83%) after coregistration of PET and MRI data. Under the same conditions, MRI was positive in 61 patients (59%), doubtful in 15 and negative in 27. The additional value of PET was predominant in patients negative or doubtful on MRI, localizing the FCD2 in 35 patients (83%). Interobserver agreement correlated with the grade of hypometabolism: it was good in patients with mild to severe hypometabolism (82-95%), but moderate in those with subtle/doubtful hypometabolism (45%). The main factors influencing positive PET localization were the grade of hypometabolism and the size of the FCD2 (P < 0.0001). Misleading location (nine patients) was associated with a small FCD2 in the mesial frontal and central regions. Following limited cortical resection mainly located in extratemporal areas (mean follow-up 5.6 years), a seizure-free outcome was achieved in 94% of patients, including Engel's class IA in 72%. CONCLUSION: In this series, 18F-FDG PET contributed to the localization of FCD2 in 83% of patients. This high localizing value was obtained by integration of electroclinical data and PET/MRI coregistration. This approach may help improve the surgical outcome in extratemporal epilepsy, even in patients negative on MRI.
Authors: C Mellerio; M-A Labeyrie; F Chassoux; C Daumas-Duport; E Landre; B Turak; F-X Roux; J-F Meder; B Devaux; C Oppenheim Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Renzo Guerrini; Michael Duchowny; Prasanna Jayakar; Pavel Krsek; Philippe Kahane; Laura Tassi; Federico Melani; Tilman Polster; Véronique M Andre; Carlos Cepeda; Darcy A Krueger; J Helen Cross; Roberto Spreafico; Mirco Cosottini; Jean Gotman; Francine Chassoux; Philippe Ryvlin; Fabrice Bartolomei; Andrea Bernasconi; Hermann Stefan; Ian Miller; Bertrand Devaux; Imad Najm; Flavio Giordano; Kristl Vonck; Carmen Barba; Ingmar Blumcke Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2015-10-05 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Ingmar Blümcke; Maria Thom; Eleonora Aronica; Dawna D Armstrong; Harry V Vinters; Andre Palmini; Thomas S Jacques; Giuliano Avanzini; A James Barkovich; Giorgio Battaglia; Albert Becker; Carlos Cepeda; Fernando Cendes; Nadia Colombo; Peter Crino; J Helen Cross; Olivier Delalande; François Dubeau; John Duncan; Renzo Guerrini; Philippe Kahane; Gary Mathern; Imad Najm; Ciğdem Ozkara; Charles Raybaud; Alfonso Represa; Steven N Roper; Noriko Salamon; Andreas Schulze-Bonhage; Laura Tassi; Annamaria Vezzani; Roberto Spreafico Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2010-11-10 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Francine Chassoux; Elisabeth Landré; Charles Mellerio; Baris Turak; Michael W Mann; Catherine Daumas-Duport; Catherine Chiron; Bertrand Devaux Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2012-01-05 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Maryse A van't Klooster; Geertjan Huiskamp; Maeike Zijlmans; René M Chr Debets; Emile F I Comans; Sandrine Bouvard; Philippe Ryvlin; Frans S S Leijten Journal: Epilepsy Res Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 3.045
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: Kun Guo; Bixiao Cui; Kun Shang; Yaqin Hou; Xiaotong Fan; Hongwei Yang; Guoguang Zhao; Jie Lu Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-02-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Katalin Borbély; Miklós Emri; István Kenessey; Márton Tóth; Júlia Singer; Péter Barsi; Zsolt Vajda; Endre Pál; Zoltán Tóth; Thomas Beyer; Tamás Dóczi; Gábor Bajzik; Dániel Fabó; József Janszky; Zsófia Jordán; Dániel Fajtai; Anna Kelemen; Vera Juhos; Max Wintermark; Ferenc Nagy; Mariann Moizs; Dávid Nagy; János Lückl; Imre Repa Journal: Biomedicines Date: 2022-04-20