Andreas Koupparis1, Nicolás von Ellenrieder2, Hui Ming Khoo3, Natalja Zazubovits2, Dang Khoa Nguyen4, Jeffery A Hall2, Roy W R Dudley5, Francois Dubeau2, Jean Gotman2. 1. Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada andreas.koupparis@mail.mcgill.ca. 2. Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan. 4. Division of Neurology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, 1000 Saint-Denis, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H2X OC1. 5. Montreal Children's Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of EEG-fMRI for epilepsy surgery, we evaluated surgical outcome in relation to the resection of the most significant EEG-fMRI response. METHODS: Patients with post-operative neuroimaging and follow-up of at least one year were included. In EEG-fMRI responses, we defined as "primary" the cluster with the highest absolute t-value located in the cortex, and evaluated three levels of confidence for the results. The threshold for low confidence was t ≥ 3.1 (p < 0.005); the one for medium confidence corresponded to correction for multiple comparisons with a false discovery rate of 0.05; and a result reached high confidence when the primary cluster was much more significant than the next highest cluster. Concordance with the resection was determined by comparison to post-operative neuroimaging. RESULTS: We evaluated 106 epilepsy surgeries in 84 patients. An increasing association between concordance and surgical outcome with higher levels of confidence was demonstrated. If the peak response was not resected, the surgical outcome was likely to be poor: for the high confidence level, no patient had a good outcome; for the medium and low levels, only 18% and 28% had a good outcome. The positive predictive value remained low for all confidence levels, indicating that removing the maximum cluster did not ensure seizure freedom. CONCLUSION: Resection of the primary EEG-fMRI cluster, especially in high confidence cases, is necessary to obtain a good outcome, but not sufficient. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provided Class II evidence that failure to resect the primary EEG-fMRI cluster is associated with poorer epilepsy surgery outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of EEG-fMRI for epilepsy surgery, we evaluated surgical outcome in relation to the resection of the most significant EEG-fMRI response. METHODS: Patients with post-operative neuroimaging and follow-up of at least one year were included. In EEG-fMRI responses, we defined as "primary" the cluster with the highest absolute t-value located in the cortex, and evaluated three levels of confidence for the results. The threshold for low confidence was t ≥ 3.1 (p < 0.005); the one for medium confidence corresponded to correction for multiple comparisons with a false discovery rate of 0.05; and a result reached high confidence when the primary cluster was much more significant than the next highest cluster. Concordance with the resection was determined by comparison to post-operative neuroimaging. RESULTS: We evaluated 106 epilepsy surgeries in 84 patients. An increasing association between concordance and surgical outcome with higher levels of confidence was demonstrated. If the peak response was not resected, the surgical outcome was likely to be poor: for the high confidence level, no patient had a good outcome; for the medium and low levels, only 18% and 28% had a good outcome. The positive predictive value remained low for all confidence levels, indicating that removing the maximum cluster did not ensure seizure freedom. CONCLUSION: Resection of the primary EEG-fMRI cluster, especially in high confidence cases, is necessary to obtain a good outcome, but not sufficient. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provided Class II evidence that failure to resect the primary EEG-fMRI cluster is associated with poorer epilepsy surgery outcomes.
Authors: M E Raichle; A M MacLeod; A Z Snyder; W J Powers; D A Gusnard; G L Shulman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2001-01-16 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Hui Ming Khoo; Nicolás von Ellenrieder; Natalja Zazubovits; Daniel He; François Dubeau; Jean Gotman Journal: Neurology Date: 2018-07-13 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Andrew P Bagshaw; Yahya Aghakhani; Christian-G Bénar; Eliane Kobayashi; Colin Hawco; François Dubeau; G Bruce Pike; Jean Gotman Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Helmut Laufs; Khalid Hamandi; Afraim Salek-Haddadi; Andreas K Kleinschmidt; John S Duncan; Louis Lemieux Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Francesca Pittau; Lorenzo Ferri; Firas Fahoum; François Dubeau; Jean Gotman Journal: Front Comput Neurosci Date: 2017-02-20 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: Sofia Markoula; Umair J Chaudhary; Suejen Perani; Alessio De Ciantis; Tinonkorn Yadee; John S Duncan; Beate Diehl; Andrew W McEvoy; Louis Lemieux Journal: Seizure Date: 2018-07-20 Impact factor: 3.184