ArticleArXiv2023
Interictal MEG abnormalities to guide intracranial electrode implantation and predict surgical outcome.
Article in ArXiv, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Intracranial EEG (iEEG) is the gold standard technique for epileptogenic zone (EZ) localisation, but requires a preconceived hypothesis of the location of the epileptogenic tissue. This placement is guided by qualitative interpretations of seizure semiology, MRI, EEG and other imaging modalities, such as magnetoencephalography (MEG). Quantitative abnormality mapping using MEG has recently been shown to have potential clinical value. We hypothesised that if quantifiable MEG abnormalities were sampled by iEEG, then patients' post-resection seizure outcome may be better. Thirty-two individuals with refractory neocortical epilepsy underwent MEG and subsequent iEEG recordings as part of pre-surgical evaluation. Eyes-closed resting-state interictal MEG band power abnormality maps were derived from 70 healthy controls as a normative baseline. MEG abnormality maps were compared to iEEG electrode implantation, with the spatial overlap of iEEG electrode placement and cerebral MEG abnormalities recorded. Finally, we assessed if the implantation of electrodes in abnormal tissue, and subsequent resection of the strongest abnormalities determined by MEG and iEEG corresponded to surgical success. Intracranial electrodes were implanted in brain tissue with the most abnormal MEG findings - in individuals that were seizure-free post-operatively (T=3.9, p=0.003), but not in those who did not become seizure free. The overlap between MEG abnormalities and electrode placement distinguished surgical outcome groups moderately well (AUC=0.68). In isolation, the resection of the strongest abnormalities as defined by MEG and iEEG separated surgical outcome groups well, AUC=0.71, AUC=0.74 respectively. A model incorporating all three features separated surgical outcome groups best (AUC=0.80). Intracranial EEG is a key tool to delineate the EZ and help render individuals seizure-free post-operatively. We showed that data-driven abnormality maps derived from resting-state MEG recordings demonstrate clinical value and may help guide electrode placement in individuals with neocortical epilepsy. Additionally, our predictive model of post-operative seizure-freedom, which leverages both MEG and iEEG recordings, could aid patient counselling of expected outcome.
Identifiers
37090233PMC10120748W4366821856What 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.