ArticleNeurology and therapy2024
Evaluating the Efficacy of CortexID Quantitative Analysis in Localization of the Epileptogenic Zone in Patients with Temporal Lobe Epilepsy.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2024. 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.
- Clinical Performance of Analog and Digital 18F-FDG PET/CT in Pediatric Epileptogenic Zone Localization: Preliminary Results.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Surgical targeting of lateralizedEpilepsia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThere remains a critical need for precise localization of the epileptogenic foci in individuals with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE).
methodsA total of 102 patients with epilepsy who underwent
resultsThe diagnostic threshold for the difference in the metabolic Z-score between the right and left sides of medial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE) was calculated as 0.87, and that for lateral temporal lobe epilepsy (LTLE) was 2.175. In patients with MTLE, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.922 for PET visual analysis, 0.853 for CortexID quantitative analysis, and 0.971 for the combined diagnosis. In patients with LTLE, the AUC was 0.842 for PET visual analysis, 0.831 for CortexID quantitative analysis, and 0.897 for the combined diagnosis. These results indicate that the diagnostic efficacy of CortexID quantitative analysis is not inferior to PET visual analysis (p > 0.05), while combined analysis significantly increases diagnostic efficacy (p < 0.05). Among the 23 patients who underwent surgery, the sensitivity and specificity of PET visual analysis for localization were 95.4% and 66.7%, and the sensitivity and specificity of CortexID quantitative analysis were 100% and 50%.
conclusionThe diagnostic efficacy of CortexID quantitative analysis is comparable to PET visual analysis in the localization of the epileptogenic zone in patients with TLE. CortexID quantitative analysis combined with visual analysis can further improve the accuracy of epileptogenic zone localization.
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.