Abstract

PurposeTo determine the agreement between five different methods of ictal EEG source imaging, and to assess their accuracy in presurgical evaluation of patients with focal epilepsy. It was hypothesized that high agreement between methods was associated with higher localization-accuracy. MethodsEEGs were recorded with a 64-electrode array. Thirty-eight seizures from 22 patients were analyzed using five different methods phase mapping, dipole fitting, CLARA, cortical-CLARA and minimum norm. Localization accuracy was determined at sub-lobar level. Reference standard was the final decision of the multidisciplinary epilepsy surgery team, and, for the operated patients, outcome one year after surgery. ResultsAgreement between all methods was obtained in 13 patients (59%) and between all but one methods in additional six patients (27%). There was a trend for minimum norm being less accurate than phase mapping, but none of the comparisons reached significance. Source imaging in cases with agreement between all methods was not more accurate than in the other cases. Ictal source imaging achieved an accuracy of 73% (for operated patients: 86%). ConclusionThere was good agreement between different methods of ictal source imaging. However, good inter-method agreement did not necessarily imply accurate source localization, since all methods faced the limitations of the inverse solution.

Highlights

  • There is compelling evidence for the role of electric source imaging (ESI) in the localization of interictal epileptiform discharges [1,2,3,4,5]

  • Ictal source imaging faces additional technical challenges

  • It was hypothesized that concordance between different methods/inverse solution was associated with a higher localization-accuracy [14]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

There is compelling evidence for the role of electric source imaging (ESI) in the localization of interictal epileptiform discharges [1,2,3,4,5]. The irritative zone generating the interictal EEG discharges might not necessarily coincide with the seizure-onset zone [6]. Ictal source imaging faces additional technical challenges (artifacts occurring during seizure, absence of ictal EEG correlate in scalp recordings, propagation of ictal activity), and it has received less attention compared to interictal analysis [5]. Several methods of ictal source imaging have been previously described and validated in clinical practice [7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. It is not known to what extent the different methods lead to the same source location, and which is the best approach for localizing ictal sources. It was hypothesized that concordance between different methods/inverse solution was associated with a higher localization-accuracy [14]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.