The Value of Magnetoencephalography to Guide Electrode Implantation in Epilepsy
- 318 Downloads
To investigate if Magnetoencephalography (MEG) can add non-redundant information to guide implantation sites for intracranial recordings (IR). The contribution of MEG to intracranial recording planning was evaluated in 12 consecutive patients assessed pre-surgically with MEG followed by IR. Primary outcome measures were the identification of focal seizure onset in IR and favorable surgical outcome. Outcome measures were compared to those of 12 patients matched for implantation type in whom non-invasive pre-surgical assessment suggested clear hypotheses for implantation (non-MEG group). In the MEG group, non-invasive assessment without MEG was inconclusive, and MEG was then used to further help identify implantation sites. In all MEG patients, at least one virtual MEG electrode generated suitable hypotheses for the location of implantations. No differences in outcome measures were found between non-MEG and MEG groups. Although the MEG group included more complex patients, it showed similar percentage of successful implantations as the non-MEG group. This suggests that MEG can contribute to identify implantation sites where standard methods failed.
KeywordsMagnetoencephalography Beamformers Epilepsy surgery Invasive recording Epileptogenic zone Magnetic source imaging
Aston MEG Centre is supported by funding from the Wellcome Trust and the Dr. Hadwen Trust for Humane Research. MRI’s used for MEG co-registration were funded by the Lord Dowding Fund for Humane Research.
This study has been approved by Aston University Research Committee (2007/42), South Birmingham Local Research Committee, and King’s College Hospital Neuroscience Audit Committee.
- Alarcon G, Kissani N, Dad M, Elwes RD, Ekanayake J, Hennessy MJ, Koutroumanidis M, Binnie CD, Polkey CE (2001) Lateralizing and localizing values of ictal onset recorded on the scalp: evidence from simultaneous recordings with intracranial foramen ovale electrodes. Epilepsia 42:1426–1437PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Carrette E, Vonck K, De Herdt V, Van Dycke A, El Tahry R, Meurs A, Raedt R, Goossens L, Van Zandijcke M, Van Maele G, Thadani V, Wadman W, Van Roost D, Boon P (2010) Predictive factors for outcome of invasive video-EEG monitoring and subsequent resective surgery in patients with refractory epilepsy. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 112:118–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Engel JJ (1993) Surgical treatment of the epilepsies. Raven Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Knowlton RC, Razdan SN, Limdi N, Elgavish RA, Killen J, Blount J, Burneo JG, Ver Hoef L, Paige L, Faught E, Kankirawatana P, Bartolucci A, Riley K, Kuzniecky R (2009) Effect of epilepsy magnetic source imaging on intracranial electrode placement. Ann Neurol 65:716–723PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Robinson SE, Nagarajan SS, Mantle M, Gibbons V, Kirsch H (2004) Localization of interictal spikes using SAM (g2) and dipole fit. Neurol Clin Neurophysiol 30:74Google Scholar
- Wheless JW, Willmore LJ, Breier JI, Kataki M, Smith JR, King DW, Meador KJ, Park YD, Loring DW, Clifton GL, Baumgartner J, Thomas AB, Constantinou JE, Papanicolaou AC (1999) A comparison of magnetoencephalography, MRI, and V-EEG in patients evaluated for epilepsy surgery. Epilepsia 40:931–941PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar