Takumi Mitsuhashi1, Masaki Sonoda2, Hirotaka Iwaki3, Aimee F Luat4, Sandeep Sood5, Eishi Asano6. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Juntendo University, Tokyo 1138421, Japan. 2. Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Yokohama City University, Yokohama 2360004, Japan. 3. Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA; Department of Epileptology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai 9808575, Japan. 4. Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA; Department of Neurology, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA. 6. Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA; Department of Neurology, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA; Translational Neuroscience Program, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202, USA. Electronic address: easano@med.wayne.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal depth electrode montages for the assessment of effective connectivity based on single-pulse electrical stimulation (SPES). To determine the effect of SPES locations on the extent of resulting neuronal propagations. METHODS: We studied 14 epilepsy patients who underwent invasive monitoring with depth electrodes and measurement of cortico-cortical evoked potentials (CCEPs) and cortico-cortical spectral responses (CCSRs). We determined the effects of electrode montage and stimulus sites on the CCEP/CCSR amplitudes. RESULTS: Bipolar and Laplacian montages effectively reduced the degree of SPES-related signal deflections at extra-cortical levels, including outside the brain, while maintaining those at the cortical level. SPES of structures more proximal to the deep white matter, compared to the cortical surface, elicited greater CCEPs and CCSRs. CONCLUSIONS: On depth electrode recording, bipolar and Laplacian montages are suitable for measurement of near-field CCEPs and CCSRs. SPES of the white matter axons may induce neuronal propagations to extensive regions of the cerebral cortex. SIGNIFICANCE: This study helps to establish the practical guidelines on the diagnostic use of CCEPs/CCSRs.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal depth electrode montages for the assessment of effective connectivity based on single-pulse electrical stimulation (SPES). To determine the effect of SPES locations on the extent of resulting neuronal propagations. METHODS: We studied 14 epilepsypatients who underwent invasive monitoring with depth electrodes and measurement of cortico-cortical evoked potentials (CCEPs) and cortico-cortical spectral responses (CCSRs). We determined the effects of electrode montage and stimulus sites on the CCEP/CCSR amplitudes. RESULTS:Bipolar and Laplacian montages effectively reduced the degree of SPES-related signal deflections at extra-cortical levels, including outside the brain, while maintaining those at the cortical level. SPES of structures more proximal to the deep white matter, compared to the cortical surface, elicited greater CCEPs and CCSRs. CONCLUSIONS: On depth electrode recording, bipolar and Laplacian montages are suitable for measurement of near-field CCEPs and CCSRs. SPES of the white matter axons may induce neuronal propagations to extensive regions of the cerebral cortex. SIGNIFICANCE: This study helps to establish the practical guidelines on the diagnostic use of CCEPs/CCSRs.
Authors: Alonso Zea Vera; Gewalin Aungaroon; Paul S Horn; Anna W Byars; Hansel M Greiner; Jeffrey R Tenney; Todd M Arthur; Nathan E Crone; Katherine D Holland; Francesco T Mangano; Ravindra Arya Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2017-07-18 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Jean Isnard; Delphine Taussig; Fabrice Bartolomei; Pierre Bourdillon; Hélène Catenoix; Francine Chassoux; Mathilde Chipaux; Stéphane Clémenceau; Sophie Colnat-Coulbois; Marie Denuelle; Stéphane Derrey; Bertrand Devaux; Georg Dorfmüller; Vianney Gilard; Marc Guenot; Anne-Sophie Job-Chapron; Elisabeth Landré; Axel Lebas; Louis Maillard; Aileen McGonigal; Lorella Minotti; Alexandra Montavont; Vincent Navarro; Anca Nica; Nicolas Reyns; Julia Scholly; Jean-Christophe Sol; William Szurhaj; Agnès Trebuchon; Louise Tyvaert; Maria Paola Valenti-Hirsch; Luc Valton; Jean-Pierre Vignal; Paul Sauleau Journal: Neurophysiol Clin Date: 2017-12-23 Impact factor: 3.734
Authors: Manuel R Mercier; Stephan Bickel; Pierre Megevand; David M Groppe; Charles E Schroeder; Ashesh D Mehta; Fred A Lado Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2016-08-21 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: George Nune; Jonathan Winawer; Andreas M Rauschecker; Mohammad Dastjerdi; Brett L Foster; Brian Wandell; Josef Parvizi Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2011-10-05 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Riki Matsumoto; Dileep R Nair; Eric LaPresto; Imad Najm; William Bingaman; Hiroshi Shibasaki; Hans O Lüders Journal: Brain Date: 2004-07-21 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Arjen Stolk; Sandon Griffin; Roemer van der Meij; Callum Dewar; Ignacio Saez; Jack J Lin; Giovanni Piantoni; Jan-Mathijs Schoffelen; Robert T Knight; Robert Oostenveld Journal: Nat Protoc Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 13.491