ArticleEpilepsia2026
Value of ultra-high-field MRI in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy and negative 3T MRI (EpiUltraStudy): Diagnostic gain of 7T structural analysis.
Article in Epilepsia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
36 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveResective epilepsy surgery is an evidence-based treatment option for patients with focal drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). Seizure outcome after surgery is largely dependent on detection and delineation of an epileptogenic lesion on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, detection fails in 30% of patients at 3 Tesla (T) MRI, thereby limiting surgical options. Diagnostic and therapeutic gain of ultra-high-field MRI in patients with 3T MRI-negative DRE is evaluated in the EpiUltraStudy. Here we report the diagnostic gain of structural 7T MRI.
methodsInclusion criteria were age ≥12 years and DRE with a suspected epileptogenic focus and negative conventional 3T MRI during pre-surgical workup. Images were evaluated independently by two neuroradiologists and a neurologist or neurosurgeon in two runs: blinded (Run 1) and with the results of additional clinical investigations (Run 2).
resultsSixty patients underwent 7T MRI. No persistent adverse events were reported. Visual assessment of 7T MRI identified lesions in 9 cases (15%), undetected on prior 3T MRI. Possible positive scan rates increased from 17% (10/60) in the blinded run to 47% (28/60) in the informed run. However, after consensus review, many of these were reclassified as negative. Eight of nine positive 7T MRI scans were initially identified by only one or two assessors. After reassessment, a total of 56% (5/9) of 7T lesions were retrospectively identified on 3T. SIGNIFICANCE: Our data suggest a benefit of 7T MRI for the detection of subtle epileptogenic lesions in patients with DRE and negative 3T MRI. Although the detection rate may appear modest compared to other reports, we present a nuanced discussion of our methodology and patient population, contributing meaningful context to the current literature. The availability of multimodal information and consensus reviews enhanced diagnostic accuracy but with higher rates of false positives, underscoring the importance of multidisciplinary cooperation in the clinical care for patients with DRE. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: www.trialregister.nl: NTR7536.
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.