ArticleBrain topography2021
Feasibility, Contrast Sensitivity and Network Specificity of Language fMRI in Presurgical Evaluation for Epilepsy and Brain Tumor Surgery.
Article in Brain topography, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Diffusion Tensor Imaging-Tractography in Resective Brain Surgery: Lesion Coverage Strategies and Patient Outcomes.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Standardization of presurgical language fMRI in Greek population: Mapping of six critical regions.Brain and behavior · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Language fMRI has become an integral part of the planning process in brain surgery. However, fMRI may suffer from confounding factors both on the patient side, as well as on the provider side. In this study, we investigate how patient-related confounds affect the ability of the patient to perform language fMRI tasks (feasibility), the task sensitivity from an image contrast point of view, and the anatomical specificity of expressive and receptive language fMRI protocols. 104 patients were referred for language fMRI in the context of presurgical procedures for epilepsy and brain tumor surgery. Four tasks were used: (1) a verbal fluency (VF) task to map vocabulary use, (2) a semantic description (SD) task to map sentence formation/semantic integration skills, (3) a reading comprehension (RC) task and (4) a listening comprehension (LC) task. Feasibility was excellent in the LC task (100%), but in the acceptable to mediocre range for the rest of the tasks (SD: 87.50%, RC: 85.57%, VF: 67.30%). Feasibility was significantly confounded by age (p = 0.020) and education level (p = 0.003) in VF, by education level (p = 0.004) and lesion laterality (p = 0.019) in SD and by age (p = 0.001), lesion laterality (p = 0.007) and lesion severity (p = 0.048) in RC. All tasks were comparable regarding sensitivity in generating statistically significant image contrast (VF: 90.00%, SD: 92.30%, RC: 93.25%, LC: 88.46%). The lobe of the lesion (p = 0.005) and the age (p = 0.009) confounded contrast sensitivity in the VF and SD tasks respectively. Both VF and LC tasks demonstrated unilateral lateralization of posterior language areas; only the LC task showed unilateral lateralization of anterior language areas. Our study highlights the effects of patient-related confounding factors on language fMRI and proposes LC as the most feasible, less confounded, and efficiently lateralizing task in the clinical presurgical context.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.