Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31568681›Full record

ArticleBrain and behavior2019

Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging versus task-based activity for language mapping and correlation with perioperative cortical mapping.

Jean-Michel Lemée, David Hassanein Berro, Florian Bernard, Eva Chinier, Louis-Marie Leiber, Philippe Menei, Aram Ter Minassian

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Brain and behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Jean-Michel LeméeDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0720-9101
David Hassanein BerroDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Caen, Caen, France.ORCID 0000-0001-7217-1851
Florian BernardDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France.ORCID 0000-0002-6110-2567
Eva ChinierDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital of Angers, Nantes, France.
Louis-Marie LeiberDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France.
Philippe MeneiDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2794-1316
Aram Ter MinassianDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPreoperative language mapping using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) aims to identify eloquent areas in the vicinity of surgically resectable brain lesions. fMRI methodology relies on the blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) analysis to identify brain language areas. Task-based fMRI studies the BOLD signal increase in brain areas during a language task to identify brain language areas, which requires patients' cooperation, whereas resting-state fMRI (rsfMRI) allows identification of functional networks without performing any explicit task through the analysis of the synchronicity of spontaneous BOLD signal oscillation between brain areas. The aim of this study was to compare preoperative language mapping using rsfMRI and task fMRI to cortical mapping (CM) during awake craniotomies.

methodsFifty adult patients surgically treated for a brain lesion were enrolled. All patients had a presurgical language mapping with both task fMRI and rsfMRI. Identified language networks were compared to perioperative language mapping using electric cortical stimulation.

resultsResting-state fMRI was able to detect brain language areas during CM with a sensitivity of 100% compared to 65.6% with task fMRI. However, we were not able to perform a specificity analysis and compare task-based and rest fMRI with our perioperative setting in the current study. In second-order analysis, task fMRI imaging included main nodes of the SN and main areas involved in semantics were identified in rsfMRI.

conclusionResting-state fMRI for presurgical language mapping is easy to implement, allowing the identification of functional brain language network with a greater sensitivity than task-based fMRI, at the cost of some precautions and a lower specificity. Further study is required to compare both the sensitivity and the specificity of the two methods and to evaluate the clinical value of rsfMRI as an alternative tool for the presurgical identification of brain language areas.

Indexed as

LanguageNeurosurgical ProceduresAdolescentAdultAgedBrainBrain MappingBrain NeoplasmsElectric StimulationFemaleFunctional NeuroimagingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedPerioperative Carebrain surgerybrain tumorfMRIlanguagerest

Identifiers

PMID31568681
PMCPMC6790308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.