| Literature DB >> 35095712 |
Michael Müller1, Martijn Dekkers2, Roland Wiest1, Kaspar Schindler2, Christian Rummel1.
Abstract
Epilepsy surgery can be a very effective therapy in medication refractory patients. During patient evaluation intracranial EEG is analyzed by clinical experts to identify the brain tissue generating epileptiform events. Quantitative EEG analysis increasingly complements this approach in research settings, but not yet in clinical routine. We investigate the correspondence between epileptiform events and a specific quantitative EEG marker. We analyzed 99 preictal epochs of multichannel intracranial EEG of 40 patients with mixed etiologies. Time and channel of occurrence of epileptiform events (spikes, slow waves, sharp waves, fast oscillations) were annotated by a human expert and non-linear excess interrelations were calculated as a quantitative EEG marker. We assessed whether the visually identified preictal events predicted channels that belonged to the seizure onset zone, that were later resected or that showed strong non-linear interrelations. We also investigated whether the seizure onset zone or the resection were predicted by channels with strong non-linear interrelations. In patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (32 of 40), epileptic spikes and the seizure onset zone predicted the resected brain tissue much better in patients with favorable seizure control after surgery than in unfavorable outcomes. Beyond that, our analysis did not reveal any significant associations with epileptiform EEG events. Specifically, none of the epileptiform event types did predict non-linear interrelations. In contrast, channels with strong non-linear excess EEG interrelations predicted the resected channels better in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy and favorable outcome. Also in the small number of patients with seizure onset in the frontal and parietal lobes, no association between epileptiform events and channels with strong non-linear excess EEG interrelations was detectable. In contrast to patients with temporal seizure onset, EEG channels with strong non-linear excess interrelations did neither predict the seizure onset zone nor the resection of these patients or allow separation between patients with favorable and unfavorable seizure control. Our study indicates that non-linear excess EEG interrelations are not strictly associated with epileptiform events, which are one key concept of current clinical EEG assessment. Rather, they may provide information relevant for surgery planning in temporal lobe epilepsy. Our study suggests to incorporate quantitative EEG analysis in the workup of clinical cases. We make the EEG epochs and expert annotations publicly available in anonymized form to foster similar analyses for other quantitative EEG methods.Entities:
Keywords: epilepsy; epilepsy surgery; epileptiform events; non-linear interrelations; quantitative EEG
Year: 2022 PMID: 35095712 PMCID: PMC8793863 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.741450
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Patients included in this study.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| p1 | I | 180/176/182 | T (B) | Non-lesional | TPE + SAHE (R) | 102 | 13 |
| *p2 | I | 182/177 | T (R) | Hippocampal sclerosis | T2/3E | 32 | 5 |
| *p3 | I | 199/179 | T (R) | Hippocampal sclerosis | T2/3E | 38 | 8 |
| *p4 | I | 179/170 | T (R) | Hippocampal sclerosis | SAHE | 31 | 13 |
| *p5.1 | I | 167/169 | F (L) | Ectopic Neurons | LE SMA | 76 | 7 |
| p5.2 | I | 177/176 | F (L) | Ectopic Neurons | LE SMA | 86 | 14 |
| *p6 | I | 170/180 | T (R) | Hippocampal sclerosis | SAHE | 32 | 7 |
| p7 | I | 180/177/181 | T (L) | Hippocampal sclerosis | LE | 37/35/34 | 8/8/7 |
| p8 | I | 185/183 | T (L) | Hippocampal sclerosis | T2/3 | 64 | 13 |
| p9 | I | 197/188 | T (L) | Non-lesional | TLE | 56 | 5 |
| p10 | I | 176/184/180 | T (R) | Hippocampal sclerosis | SAHE | 34 | 10 |
| *p11 | I | 140/129/123 | T (R) | Hippocampal sclerosis | TPE + SAHE | 37/38/38 | 9 |
| p12 | I | 178/166 | T (L) | Glioma | LE T | 74 | 13 |
| p13 | I | 147/155 | F (R) | Hemorrhage | LE | 80 | 6 |
| p14 | I | 115/122 | T (L) | Bilateral HC sclerosis | SAHE | 59 | 17 |
| p15 | I | 185/171/179 | T (L) | Hippocampal sclerosis | LE T | 40 | 11 |
| *p16 | I | 164/185 | T (R) | Hippocampal sclerosis | LE MT | 32 | 4 |
| p17 | I | 180/181 | F (R) | Non-lesional, mild FCD | LE | 66 | 5 |
| *p18 | I | 151/166 | T (L) | Hippocampal sclerosis | SAHE | 31 | 7 |
| *p19 | I | 174/177 | F (L) | Post-traumatic lesion | LE F | 88 | 7 |
| *p20 | II | 177/182 | T (L) | Hippocampal sclerosis | TLE + SAHE | 48 | 7 |
| p21 | II | 186/180 | T (L) | Other abnormal | TLE + SAHE | 32 | 16 |
| p22 | II | 183/180 | T (R) | Non-lesional | SAHE | 99 | 11 |
| *p23 | II | 185/182/187 | T (L) | Post-ischemic cyst | LE MT | 29 | 2 |
| *p24 | III | 180/179/158 | F (L) | Non-lesional, FCD Ib | LE | 69/70/70 | 6/4/4 |
| p25 | III | 188/180 | F (R) | FCD II | LE F+T | 92 | 8 |
| *p26 | III | 154/186 | T (L) | Non-lesional | T2/3E | 32 | 9 |
| *p27 | III | 158/186/182 | T (R) | Discrete alterations | SAHE | 76 | 16 |
| p28.1 | IV | 180/179 | T (L) | Other abnormal | LE | 59 | 2 |
| p29.1 | IV | 182/180/183 | T (L) | Non-lesional, Meningitis | TLE | 61 | 10 |
| p29.2 | IV | 168/168/165 | T (L) | Non-lesional, Meningitis | TLE | 48 | 8 |
| p30 | IV | 179/179 | T (R) | Non-lesional, Gliosis | T2/3E | 100 | 13 |
| p31 | IV | 113/112 | T (L) | MT asymmetry | T2/3E | 49 | 8 |
| p32 | IV | 181/178/180 | P (L) | MT asymmetry | LE | 92/94/94 | 4 |
| p33 | IV | 113/120 | T (L) | FCD IIb | LE MT | 24 | 6 |
| *p34 | IV | 182/184 | T (B) | MT sclerosis | SAHE (R) | 32 | 14 |
| *p28.2 | 179/178 | T (L) | Other abnormal | 64 | |||
| *p35 | 180/180/177 | T (B) | Thickened MT structures | 32 | |||
| p36 | 180/189 | T (L) | TO Pachygyria right | 59 | |||
| p37 | 129/177 | P (L) | FCD | 68 | |||
| *p38 | 197/180/195 | T (R) | Non-lesional | 24 | |||
| *p39 | 178/181 | T (B) | Other abnormal | 32 | |||
| p40 | 179/180 | T (R) | MT asymmetry | 32 |
Indicated are the post-surgical seizure control according to the Engel classification scheme, durations of the included epochs, the location of seizure onset, etiological factors, the type of resection, the total number of artifact free channels, and the number of channels recording from RBT. Nineteen of these patients were already included in our preceding study (.
L, left; R, right; B, bilateral; T, temporal; F, frontal; P, parietal; FCD, focal cortial dysplasia; SMA, supplementary motor area; LE, lesionectomy; TLE, temporal lobectomy; TPE, temporal pole-ectomy; T2/3E, temporal 2/3 resection; SAHE, selective amygdala-hippocampectomy.
Figure 1Example display of iEEG signals and corresponding non-linear excess interrelations. Shown are 8 s of preictal iEEG signals (panel 1) with various annotations of epileptiform events (green boxes). The non-linear excess interrelation matrices are shown for the selected 8-s segment (panel 2) and as average over the entire epoch of 180 s duration (panel 3). The core channels of both matrices are indicated by arrows on the respective y-axes and the selected segment's core channel TAR3 is in addition plotted in red in the EEG display. The RBT is indicated by arrows on the x-axes of the matrices and typeset in boldface in the EEG display. The similarity between all segment-wise matrices and their epoch-wise average was measured by the Pearson correlation coefficient between their elements (panel 4). High precision and low recall of the core of the selected segment to predict the RBT are representative for the entire epoch (panel 5).
Figure 2Epoch-wise frequency of preictal epileptiform events. To compare the number of events across different epoch lengths and different implantation schemes (i.e. different number of iEEG channels), we normalized to the epoch duration and total number of channels that comprised events. We did not normalize to the total number of channels implanted, because the portion of channels recording from tissue able to produce epileptiform events varied between patients. Epochs are grouped patient-wise. Patients with a favorable post-surgical outcome appear in the upper panel. The dashed vertical line in the lower panel separates patients with an unfavorable outcome (left) resp. without surgery (right). IDs of patients with temporal lobe epilepsy are plotted in bold face.
Figure 3Precision of preictal epileptiform events to predict various channel sets. Results are grouped by post-surgical outcome (favorable/unfavorable) resp. those without surgery (n/a). In all panels the circled dot indicates the median of the distribution, the first (q1) and third quartile (q3) are indicated by the bottom and top edges of the box and the whiskers comprise all data points in the range q1−1.5*(q3−q1) to q3+1.5*(q3−q1). Values beyond this range are displayed as dots. The p-values for differences between the favorable and unfavorable outcome groups is indicated at the top. Similar figures for recall and F1-score can be found in the Supplementary Materials.
Distribution of epoch-wise accuracy quantifiers for predictions.
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
| Events to SOZ | Precision | 0.24 [0.13, 0.35] | 0.21 [0.13, 0.41] | 0.25 [0.075, 0.41] | 0.689 |
| Recall | 0.25 [0.13, 0.46] | 0.19 [0.12, 0.38] | 0.25 [0.1, 0.38] | 0.296 | |
| F1-score | 0.24 [0.13, 0.38] | 0.19 [0.12, 0.38] | 0.22 [0.087, 0.41] | 0.523 | |
| Events to RBT | Precision | 0.47 [0.28, 0.62] | 0.29 [0.14, 0.45] | n/a | 0.019 |
| Recall | 0.17 [0.098, 0.28] | 0.13 [0.038, 0.18] | n/a | 0.018 | |
| F1-score | 0.23 [0.15, 0.37] | 0.19 [0.06, 0.27] | n/a | 0.022 | |
| Events to Core | Precision | 0.15 [0.064, 0.28] | 0.046 [0.012, 0.25] | 0.3 [0.12, 0.39] | 0.034 |
| Recall | 0.35 [0.22, 0.51] | 0.13 [0.026, 0.48] | 0.34 [0.25, 0.38] | 0.013 | |
| F1-score | 0.24 [0.088, 0.35] | 0.068 [0.016, 0.28] | 0.27 [0.13, 0.35] | 0.014 | |
| SOZ to RBT | Precision | 1 [0.62, 1] | 0.2 [0, 0.85] | n/a | <10−3 |
| Recall | 0.29 [0.22, 0.45] | 0.062 [0, 0.31] | n/a | 0.008 | |
| F1-score | 0.44 [0.36, 0.53] | 0.095 [0, 0.43] | n/a | 0.004 | |
| Core to SOZ | Precision | 1 [0, 1] | 0 [0, 0.05] | 0.5 [0, 1] | 0.002 |
| Recall | 0.25 [0, 0.5] | 0 [0, 0.062] | 0.29 [0, 0.8] | 0.002 | |
| F1-score | 0.4 [0, 0.67] | 0 [0, 0.071] | 0.34 [0, 0.5] | 0.001 | |
| Core to RBT | Precision | 1 [1, 1] | 0 [0, 0.7] | n/a | <10−5 |
| Recall | 0.18 [0.077, 0.25] | 0 [0, 0.11] | n/a | <10−4 | |
| F1-score | 0.3 [0.14, 0.4] | 0 [0, 0.15] | n/a | <10−4 |
Figure 4Breakdown of the prediction of channel sets by specific event types. Shown is the precision grouped by the post-surgical outcome.
Figure 5Association among various channel sets. Group-wise precision of the SOZ to predict the RBT resp. of the core to predict either of them.
Figure 6Epoch-wise averaged non-linear excess interrelation matrices of two patients with presurgical bilateral seizure onset. Shown are the epochs preceding the seizures with onset contralateral to the resection. Above the matrices, the SOZ and the RBT are indicated by white bars. Below the matrices, the node strength (NS) and the channel-wise number of events (EVT, normalized to the respective color scale) are displayed.