| Literature DB >> 30069576 |
Andrés Perissinotti1, Aida Niñerola-Baizán2,3, Sebastià Rubí4,5, Mar Carreño6, Berta Marti-Fuster2,3, Javier Aparicio7, Maria Mayoral1, Antonio Donaire6, Nuria Sanchez-Izquierdo1, Nuria Bargalló8, Jordi Rumiá9, Teresa Boget10, Francesca Pons1,3, Francisco Lomeña1, Domènec Ros2,3, Javier Pavía1,2, Xavier Setoain11,12,13.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We present a modified version of the SISCOM procedure that uses interictal PET instead of interictal SPECT for seizure onset zone localization. We called this new nuclear imaging processing technique PISCOM (PET interictal subtracted ictal SPECT coregistered with MRI).Entities:
Keywords: Functional neuroimaging; PET in epilepsy; PISCOM; SISCOM; SPECT in epilepsy
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30069576 PMCID: PMC6208811 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-018-4080-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging ISSN: 1619-7070 Impact factor: 9.236
Epileptogenic zone location, SISCOM, PISCOM and MRI findings, surgical resection, histology results, ictal SPECT injection time to seizure, follow-up time and surgical outcome in all the patients studied
| Patient no. | Age (years) | Sex | Epileptogenic zone locationa | SISCOM | PISCOM | MRIc | Surgical resection | Histology | Injection time (s) | Follow-up (years) | Engel class | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Identification successb | Result | Identification successb | ||||||||||
| P01 | 32 | M | Right MT | Right MT | Successful | Right MT and pole | Successful | Right MTS with pole compromise | Right ATL | MTS | 36 | 2 | I |
| P02 | 61 | F | Left MT and LT | Left LT | Successful | Left T pole | Successful | Left MTS | Left ATL | MTS + FCD IIIa | 15 | 4 | I |
| P03 | 33 | M | Left MT | Left T pole | Successful | Left T pole | Successful | Left MTS with pole compromise | Left ATL | MTS | 23 | 5 | I |
| P04 | 46 | F | Right MT and LT posterior | Right T pole | Successful | Right T pole | Successful | Right MTS with pole compromise and posterior dysplasia | Right ATL and LT posterior | MTS + FCD IIIa | 25 | 2 | I |
| P05 | 35 | M | Right LT | Right T pole | Successful | Right T pole | Successful | Right P cavernoma | Right T lateral | Gliosis | 19 | 2 | I |
| P06 | 30 | M | Right MT | Right T pole | Successful | Right T pole | Successful | Right MTS | Right ATL | MTS | 34 | 4 | I |
| P07 | 56 | M | Right MT | Right MT | Successful | Right T pole | Successful | Right MTS | Right ATL | MTS | 14 | 2.5 | I |
| P08 | 41 | F | Right MT | Negative | Right T pole | Successful | Right MTS | Right ATL | MTS | 17 | 3 | I | |
| P09 | 50 | F | Left MT | Left T pole | Successful | Left T pole | Successful | Left MTS | Left ATL | MTS | 18 | 5 | I |
| P10 | 25 | F | Right F posterior | Right F posterior | Successful | Right F posterior | Successful | Negative | Right F partial lobectomy | FCD II | 8 | 2 | I |
| P11 | 23 | F | Right MT | Right T pole | Successful | Right T pole | Successful | Right MTS | Right ATL | MTS | 46 | 5 | I |
| P12 | 40 | F | Right MT | Right MT | Successful | Right MT | Successful | Negative | Right ATL | MTS | 26 | 3 | I |
| P13 | 31 | F | Left MT | Left MT | Successful | Right MT | Unsuccessful | Left T fusiform gyrus dysplasia | Left T fusiform gyrus | FCD Ia | 32 | 3.5 | I |
| P14 | 34 | F | Left LT posterior | Left MT | Unsuccessful | Left T pole | Unsuccessful | Left T posterior dysplasia or ganglioglioma | Left T posterior | Low-grade glioma | 22 | 4 | I |
| P15 | 52 | F | Right LT | Right T pole | Successful | Right T pole | Successful | Negative | Right ATL | FCD I | 23 | 2.5 | I |
| P16 | 25 | M | Right F superior | Right F superior | Successful | Right MT | Unsuccessful | Right F superior dysplasia | Right F partial lobectomy | FCD | 10 | 2 | I |
| P17 | 18 | M | Right Insula | Left P | Unsuccessful | Right Insula | Successful | Right Insula dysplasia | Right insula | Grade I ganglioglioma | 8 | 2 | I |
| P18 | 44 | F | Right MT | Right T pole | Successful | Right T pole | Successful | Right MTS with pole compromise | Right ATL | MTS | 30 | 3.5 | I |
| P19 | 11 | F | Right F middle | Right F middle | Successful | Right F middle | Successful | Right F middle dysplasia | Right F partial lobectomy | FCD IIa | 37 | 5 | I |
| P20 | 9 | F | Right F inferior | Negative | Right F inferior | Successful | Right F middle dysplasia | Right F partial lobectomy | FCD IIb | 18 | 5 | I | |
| P21 | 4 | M | Left F superior | Negative | Negative | Left F superior dysplasia | Left F partial lobectomy | FCD IIa | 4 | 4 | I | ||
| P22 | 4 | M | Right F | Left MT | Unsuccessful | Right F middle and superior | Successful | Right F superior, orbital and cingulate dysplasia | Right F partial lobectomy | FCD IIa | 8 | 4 | I |
| P23 | 9 | M | Left P inferior | Left P inferior | Successful | Left P inferior | Successful | Left P inferior dysplasia | Left P partial lobectomy | FCD IIb | 22 | 3.5 | I |
T temporal, F frontal, P parietal, MT medial temporal lobe, LT lateral neocortical temporal lobe, MTS mesial temporal sclerosis, FCD focal cortical dysplasia, ATL anterior temporal lobectomy
aBased on surgical resection, histology and follow-up results
bSuccess in identifying the seizure onset zone
cMRI results not blinded to the clinical data and results of other tests
Fig. 1Reprocessed FDG PET images. Axial images: a original FDG PET, b reprocessed FDG PET (rFDG PET), c interictal SPECT. All images are coregistered with MRI images. The colour scale indicates intensity values. L left, R right
Fig. 2SPM results. SPM paired t test comparing interictal reprocessed FDG PET (rFDG PET) and interictal SPECT images showed higher activity on SPECT images with significant differences exclusively in the cerebellum, midbrain and basal ganglia. On the left, significant SPM results are shown in the form of maximum intensity projections (SPMmip) in the sagittal, coronal and axial views. On the right, t values obtained from the paired t test are superimposed on the MRI image available in SPM. Only significant t values are shown (colour scale from red to white)
Fig. 3Visual analysis results. Venn diagram showing total number of patients studied by SISCOM and PISCOM, successful identifications of the SOZ and their concordance
Results of VOI-based analysis
| Patient no. | Number of VOIsa | SOZ volume (cm3) | Percent of SOX voxels shared | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SISCOM | PISCOM | SISCOM | PISCOM | SISCOM shared with PISCOMb | PISCOM shared with SISCOMc | |
| P01 | 10 | 2 | 8.08 | 11.82 | 69.90 | 47.80 |
| P02 | 14 | 5 | 18.34 | 16.28 | 53.38 | 60.14 |
| P03 | 6 | 3 | 17.90 | 29.59 | 84.29 | 50.97 |
| P04 | 11 | 2 | 8.65 | 11.10 | 60.44 | 47.06 |
| P05 | 2 | 4 | 9.16 | 6.42 | 37.34 | 53.24 |
| P06 | 23 | 5 | 15.34 | 19.11 | 64.18 | 51.53 |
| P07 | 1 | 1 | 6.00 | 7.13 | 39.04 | 32.85 |
| P09 | 11 | 8 | 15.22 | 9.14 | 47.27 | 78.70 |
| P10 | 13 | 6 | 4.92 | 4.95 | 66.60 | 66.29 |
| P11 | 18 | 2 | 8.27 | 3.98 | 19.43 | 40.34 |
| P12 | 8 | 3 | 3.55 | 2.51 | 43.88 | 61.98 |
| P15 | 5 | 2 | 16.21 | 13.45 | 67.20 | 81.02 |
| P18 | 5 | 3 | 2.88 | 5.75 | 77.44 | 38.82 |
| P19 | 25 | 6 | 48.02 | 50.08 | 36.38 | 34.88 |
| P23 | 18 | 1 | 5.28 | 3.86 | 43.32 | 59.28 |
| Mean | 11.33 | 3.53 | 12.58 | 13.01 | 54.01 | 53.66 |
aNumber of SOZ + indeterminate activity VOIs in all 15 patients with concordant successful results
bNumber of voxels in SISCOM SOZ VOI shared with PISCOM SOZ VOI/total number of voxels in SISCOM SOZ VOI × 100
cNumber of voxels in PISCOM SOZ VOI shared with SISCOM SOZ VOI/total number of voxels in PISCOM SOZ VOI × 100
Fig. 4VOI-based analysis. Top: Example patient (P23) with a left parietal inferior SOZ shown by SISCOM (a) and PISCOM (b) (arrows) and VOI-based analysis (arrowheads). The SISCOM study shows higher indeterminate activity due to propagation, residual count data or artefacts indicated by a greater number of VOIs in the VOI-based analysis. The colour scale indicates relative differences between ictal and interictal image values. Bottom: Example patients (P01, c; P04, d; P10, e) with a SOZ in the right temporal and right frontal lobes successfully identified concordantly by PISCOM (red) and SISCOM (blue). Selected SOZ VOIs and MRI images were rendered with 3D Slicer (version 4.6.2) for illustrative purposes. L left, R right, A anterior, P posterior
Fig. 5Example patient (P22, a 4-year-old child with a confirmed right frontal epileptogenic zone) showing discordant PISCOM and SISCOM results. Axial ictal and interictal SPECT, original FDG PET, PISCOM and SISCOM images of the brain at the frontal (a) and temporal (b) lobes. The PISCOM images show successful identification of the SOZ in the right frontal lobule (a) while the left medial temporal lobe shows focal uptake with lower activity interpreted as propagation (b). The SISCOM images show diffuse uptake in right frontal lobe interpreted as indeterminate activity (a), and focal activity in the left medial temporal lobe incorrectly identified as the SOZ (b). Colour scale intensity values in the SPECT and PET images, relative differences between ictal and interictal image values in the PISCOM and SISCOM images. All images are coregistered with MRI images. L left, R right