Introduction Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is considered to be the standard method regarding non-invasive language mapping. However, repetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) gains increasing importance with respect to that purpose. However, comparisons between both methods are sparse. Objective To compare the results of rTMS and fMRI language mapping in healthy volunteers. Patients & methods We performed fMRI and rTMS language mapping of the left hemisphere in 40 healthy, right-handed subjects in combination with the tasks that are most commonly used in the neurosurgical context (fMRI: word-generation = WGEN task; rTMS: object-naming = ON task). Different rTMS error rate thresholds (ERTs) were calculated, and Cohen’s kappa coefficient and the cortical parcellation system (CPS) were used for systematic comparison of the two techniques. Results Overall, mean kappa coefficients were low, revealing no distinct agreement. We found the highest agreement for both techniques when using the 2-out-of-3 rule (CPS region defined as language-positive in terms of rTMS if at least 2 out of 3 stimulations led to a naming error). However, kappa for this threshold was only 0.24, indicating fair agreement. Conclusions Regarding the comparison of fMRI and rTMS, language mapping results seem to differ in a wide range, at least when the tasks of the present trials are used. Since it is not possible to verify the present results via direct cortical stimulation (DCS) as the gold standard method, we must be careful to call one of the two techniques the true one. However, this study yields valuable results regarding the comparison of these frequently used mapping techniques for the most common language tasks applied in the neurosurgical routine.
Read full abstract