| Literature DB >> 31909306 |
Gianpaolo Toscano1,2,3, Margherita Carboni1,4, Maria Rubega4, Laurent Spinelli1, Francesca Pittau1, Andrea Bartoli5, Shahan Momjian5, Raffaele Manni2, Michele Terzaghi2,3, Serge Vulliemoz1, Margitta Seeck1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to determine whether visual analysis of high density EEG (HD-EEG) would provide similar localizing information comparable to electrical source imaging (ESI).Entities:
Keywords: Electric source imaging; Epilepsy surgery; Focus localization; High density EEG; MRI; Source analysis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31909306 PMCID: PMC6939057 DOI: 10.1016/j.cnp.2019.09.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Pract ISSN: 2467-981X
Clinical data and interictal pattern. Legend: M male, F female, R right, L left, F frontal, T temporal, P parietal, O occipital.
| PATIENT | Sex | Age of epilepsy onset (y) | Age at surgery | Outcome (Engel Class) | Surgical area | Lesion type | Scalp monitoring – EEG Visual Analysis | Scalp HD – EEG Visual Analysis | ESI – 50% | ESI – peak | Concordance/Discordance between Scalp HD and ESI Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PAT 1 | F | 18 | 21 | I A | R orbito-frontal resection | – | Right FT | 2/5 | Inside | Inside | Discordant |
| PAT 2 | M | 9 | 29 | I A | R lateral temporal resection | Cavernous hemangioma | Right FT | 2/5 | Outside (23.31 mm) | Outside (23.31 mm) | Concordant |
| PAT3 | F | 3 | 44 | I A | R amygdalo-hippocampectomy and temporal polectomy | – | Right FT | 5/5 | Inside | Inside | Concordant |
| PAT 4 | F | 7 | 31 | II A | L frontal resection | Cortical dysplasia | Left F | 3/5 | Outside (19.99 mm) | Outside (30.75 mm) | Concordant |
| PAT 5 | F | 9 | 12 | I A | L fronto-parietal interhemispheric resection | Cortical dysplasia | Left FC | 5/5 | Outside (31.2 mm) | Outside (31.2 mm) | Discordant |
| PAT6 | F | 6 | 10 | I A | L amygdalo-hippocampectomy and temporal polectomy | Cortical dysplasia | Left T | 5/5 | Inside | Inside | Concordant |
| PAT 7 | M | 20 | 37 | I A | R amygdalo-hippocampectomy | Hippocampal sclerosis | Right FT | 3/5 | Inside | Inside | Discordant |
| PAT 8 | F | 11 | 30 | I A | R temporal Polectomy | Cortical dysplasia | Right FT | 5/5 | Inside | Inside | Concordant |
| PAT 9 | M | 10 | 30 | I A | R amygdalo-hippocampectomy and temporal polectomy | Cortical dysplasia | Right T | 4/5 | Inside | Inside | Discordant |
| PAT 10 | M | 22 | 28 | I A | L temporal Anterior resection | Hippocampal sclerosis | Left T | 5/5 | Inside | Inside | Concordant |
| PAT 11 | F | 14 | 27 | I D | L parieto-opercular resection | Cortical dysplasia | Left T | 1/5 | Outside (17.5 mm) | Outside (17.5 mm) | Concordant |
| PAT 12 | F | 28 | 37 | I D | L temporal polectomy | Ganglioglioma | Left FT | 5/5 | Inside | Inside | Concordant |
| PAT 13 | M | 25 | 32 | I A | R amygdalo-hippocampectomy and temporal polectomy | Hippocampal sclerosis | Right FT | 5/5 | Inside | Inside | Concordant |
| PAT 14 | F | 11 | 19 | I A | L temporal posterior resection | Cortical dysplasia | Left TP | 2/5 | Outside (15.2 mm) | Outside (15.2 mm) | Concordant |
| PAT 15 | F | 9 months | 13 | III A | L frontal resection | Cortical dysplasia and heterotopy | Left FP | 0/5 | Outside (40.2 mm) | Outside (59.3 mm) | Concordant |
| PAT 16 | F | 12 | 21 | III A | L premotor cortectomy | Perinatal Lesion | Left F | 3/5 | Outside (36.1 mm) | Outside (36.1 mm) | Concordant |
| PAT 17 | F | 24 | 53 | II C | R temporal anterior resection | – | Right T | 5/5 | Outside (11.2 mm) | Outside (9 mm) | Discordant |
| PAT 18 | M | 34 | 44 | III A | L parieto-Occipital resection | Tumor | Left TP | 0/5 | Outside (75.23 mm) | Outside (22.49 mm) | Concordant |
| PAT 19 | M | 17 | 44 | I A | L amygdalo-hippocampectomy and Temporal polectomy | Hippocampal sclerosis | Left T | 5/5 | Inside | Inside | Concordant |
| PAT 20 | F | 9 | 20 | IV B | R frontal | Cortical dysplasia | Bilateral FT | 2/5 | Inside | Outside (14.1 mm) | Discordant |
Fig. 1Example of method for spike selection and comparison between visual EEG results and Reference-Electrodes (RE) (PAT 13 in Table 1). A) Identification of the IED on standard montage. B) interictal discharge displayed using AVG referential montage; the 5 electrodes in which the signal is wider are selected (red-marked). C) Left: postoperative MRI showing right temporal resection. Right: 3D reconstruction of the removed area; the centroid of the resected zone is marked in red. D) Left: Top, table showing the nearest 13 electrodes (5% of 256) to the resected zone (RE); Bottom, table showing the 5 electrodes marked by visual analysis. Right: electrodes coregistered on the head of the patient; the RE are marked in purple; the 5 electrodes identified by visual analysis are rounded by a blue circle. In this case, all the 5 electrodes detected by the epileptologist were inside the RE; hence, for this patient, the visual analysis localization has been considered fully correct.
Fig. 2Examples of concordant (A) and discordant (B) ESI localizations at spike peak and 50% of spike slope. Legend: A anterior, P posterior, R right, L left. A Same patient shown in Fig. 1, good outcome - Engel IA (PAT 13 in Table 1). Left: Top, average spike with cursor pointed at the peak of the spike; bottom, cursor pointed at 50% of the rising phase. Right: Transversal and frontal section of MRI showing ESI. In this case, ESI obtained at the 50% of the spike slope and at spike peak both pointed inside the resected area. B Poor outcome patient - Engel IV B (PAT 20 in Table 1). Left: Top, average spike with cursor pointed at the peak of the spike; bottom, cursor pointed at 50% of the rising phase. Right: Transversal and frontal section of MRI showing ESI. In this case, ESI obtained at the 50% of the spike slope and at spike peak localize the source in two different brain areas.
The number of patients classified as TP (true positive), FP (false positive), TN (true negative), and FN (false negative) for the two methods.
| # of Patients | TP | FP | TN | FN |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visual analysis | 7/20 | 2/20 | 6/20 | 5/20 |
| ESI | 9/20 | 1/20 | 7/20 | 3/20 |
Fig. 3Comparison between Visual HD-EEG analysis (blue column) and ESI (orange column) in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.
Fig. 4Boxplot Graph - Comparison between ESI at 50% and ESI at peak. X axis: outcomes of the patients (Engel Class) - Y axis: distance between ESI (50% of the rising phase) and ESI (peak). The distance between the two ESI localizations increases with the worsening of the outcomes of the patients (for IA versus III-IV, p = NS; for IA to IID versus III-IV, p = 0.05).