Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27079196›Full record

ArticleNeuroradiology2016

Preoperative language mapping by repetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation and diffusion tensor imaging fiber tracking and their comparison to intraoperative stimulation.

Nico Sollmann, Antonia Kubitscheck, Stefanie Maurer, Sebastian Ille, Theresa Hauck, Jan S Kirschke, Florian Ringel, Bernhard Meyer, Sandro M Krieg

Abstract readComparative StudyControlled Clinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroradiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Electrical Stimulation Mapping of the Brain: Basic Principles and Emerging Alternatives.Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Nico SollmannDepartment of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, München, 81675, Germany.
Antonia KubitscheckDepartment of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, München, 81675, Germany.
Stefanie MaurerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, München, 81675, Germany.
Sebastian IlleDepartment of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, München, 81675, Germany.
Theresa HauckDepartment of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, München, 81675, Germany.
Jan S KirschkeSection of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, München, Germany.
Florian RingelDepartment of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, München, 81675, Germany.
Bernhard MeyerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, München, 81675, Germany.
Sandro M KriegDepartment of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, München, 81675, Germany. sandro.krieg@tum.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRepetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can be used for preoperative language mapping, but it still suffers from comparatively high sensitivity and low specificity when compared to direct cortical stimulation (DCS). Therefore, this study evaluates whether the additional consideration of rTMS-based diffusion tensor imaging fiber tracking (DTI FT) for identifying language-positive brain regions improves specificity when compared to DCS.

methodsWe performed rTMS, rTMS-based DTI FT, and DCS during awake surgery combined with object naming in 20 patients suffering from left-sided perisylvian brain lesions. For rTMS, different error rate thresholds (ERTs) and error types were considered, and DTI FT was conducted with individualized fractional anisotropy thresholds (FATs). Then, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) for rTMS vs. DCS, rTMS-based DTI FT vs. DCS, and rTMS spots confirmed by rTMS-based DTI FT vs. DCS were calculated.

resultsIn general, rTMS vs. DCS was in good accordance with previous literature (sensitivity/specificity: 92.7/13.3 % for all naming errors without ERT). In addition, rTMS-based DTI FT vs. DCS led to balanced results when tracking was based on all errors as well (sensitivity/specificity: 62.8/64.3 % for 100 % FAT). However, rTMS combined with rTMS-based DTI FT vs. DCS did not lead to any improvement in specificity when compared to rTMS vs. DCS alone.

conclusionThe additional use of rTMS-based DTI FT to rTMS did not improve the identification of DCS-positive language areas during awake surgery. Yet, concerning rTMS-based DTI FT, this new technique must be validated itself by intraoperative subcortical stimulation.

Indexed as

LanguageAdultBrainBrain MappingBrain NeoplasmsChildDiffusion Tensor ImagingFemaleHumansIntraoperative Neurophysiological MonitoringMaleMiddle AgedNerve NetPreoperative CareReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityDiffusion tensor imagingDirect cortical stimulationFiber trackingLanguageNavigated transcranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID27079196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.