Ladino LD, Balaguera P, Rascovsky S, Delgado J, Llano J, Hernández-Ronquillo L, Gómez-Arias B, Téllez-Zenteno JF

Language: English
References: 25
Page: 112-118
PDF size: 169.75 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging is an essential tool in the pre-surgical evaluation of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.
Objective: Our aim was to assess the value of re-imaging patients with focal drug-resistant epilepsy.
Methods: Thirty patients with negative or non-conclusive 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging were rescanned with 1.5T and 3T. All of them had previous 1.5 scans with no seizure protocol in a non-specialized center. Two neuroradiologists who were blinded to prior imaging results randomly reviewed the magnetic resonance images. Kappa score was used to assess the reliability.
Results: Mean age of patients was 30 (SD ± 11) years. The intra-observer agreement for the first radiologist was 0.74 for 1.5T and 0.71 for 3T. In the second radiologist it was 0.82 and 0.66, respectively. Three lesions (10%) were identified by general radiologists in non-specialized centers using a 1.5T standard protocol. In our center a consensus between two neuroradiologists using epilepsy protocol identified seven lesions (23%) using 1.5T and 10 (33%) using 3T (p ‹ 0.01). In 28% of patients this additional information resulted in a change in clinical management.
Conclusions: 3T magnetic resonance imaging rescanning improves the diagnostic yield in patients with focal epilepsy and previous negative 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging. Use of 3T magnetic resonance imaging, epilepsy protocols, and interpretation by experienced neuroradiologists is highly recommended.

REFERENCES

1. Lüders HO, Najm I, Nair D, Widdess-Walsh P, Bingman W. The epileptogenic zone: general principles. Epileptic Disord. 2006; 8(Suppl 2):S1-9.

2. Duncan JS. Imaging in the surgical treatment of epilepsy. Nat Rev Neurol. 2010;6:537-50.

3. Craven IJ, Griffiths PD, Bhattacharyya D, et al. 3.0 T MRI of 2000 consecutive patients with localisation-related epilepsy. Br J Radiol. 2012;85:1236-42.

4. Téllez-Zenteno JF, Hernández Ronquillo L, Moien-Afshari F, Wiebe S. Surgical outcomes in lesional and non-lesional epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Epilepsy Res. 2010;89:310-18.

5. Griffiths PD, Coley SC, Connolly DJ, et al. MR imaging of patients with localisation-related seizures: initial experience at 3.0T and relevance to the NICE guidelines. Clin Radiol. 2005;60:1090-99.

6. Friedman E. Epilepsy imaging in adults: getting it right. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;203:1093-103.

7. Commission on Classification and Terminology of the International League Against Epilepsy. Proposal for revised classification of epilepsies and epileptic syndromes. Epilepsia. 1989;30: 389-99.

8. Kwan P, Arzimanoglou A, Berg AT, et al. Definition of drug resistant epilepsy: consensus proposal by the ad hoc Task Force of the ILAE Commission on Therapeutic Strategies. Epilepsia. 2010;51:1069-77.

9. Kwan P, Schachter SC, Brodie MJ. Drug-resistant epilepsy. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:919-26.

10. Shah AK, Mittal S. Evaluation of magnetic resonance imagingnegative drug-resistant epilepsy. Ann Indian Acad Neurol. 2014; 17(Suppl 1):S80-8.

11. Avrahami E, Cohn DF, Neufeld M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with complex partial seizures and normal computerized tomography (CT) scan. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 1987;89:231-5.

12. Jabbari B, Gunderson CH, Wippold F, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in partial complex epilepsy. Arch Neurol. 1986;43: 869-72.

13. Knake S, Triantafyllou C, Wald LL, et al. 3T phased array MRI improves the presurgical evaluation in focal epilepsies: a prospective study. Neurology. 2005;65:1026-31.

14. Orbach DB, Wu C, Law M, et al. Comparing real-world advantages for the clinical neuroradiologist between a high field (3 T), a phased array (1.5 T) vs. a single-channel 1.5-T MR system. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;24:16-24.

15. von Oertzen J, Urbach H, Jungbluth S, Kurthen M, Reuber M, Fernández G, et al. Standard magnetic resonance imaging is inadequate for patients with refractory focal epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;73:643-7.

16. Goyal M, Bangert BA, Lewin JS, Cohen ML, Robinson S. Highresolution MRI enhances identification of lesions amenable to surgical therapy in children with intractable epilepsy. Epilepsia. 2004;45:954-9.

17. Winston GP, Micallef C, Kendell BE, et al. The value of repeat neuroimaging for epilepsy at a tertiary referral centre: 16 years of experience. Epilepsy Res. 2013;105:349-55.

18. Zijlmans M, de Kort GA, Witkamp TD, et al. 3T versus 1.5T phased-array MRI in the presurgical work-up of patients with partial epilepsy of uncertain focus. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009; 30:256-62.

19. Mellerio C, Labeyrie MA, Chassoux F, et al. 3T MRI improves the detection of transmantle sign in type 2 focal cortical dysplasia. Epilepsia. 2014;55:117-22.

20. Strandberg M, Larsson EM, Backman S, Källén K. Pre-surgical epilepsy evaluation using 3T MRI. Do surface coils provide additional information? Epileptic Disord. 2008;10:83-92.

21. Tassi L, Colombo N, Garbelli R, et al. Focal cortical dysplasia: neuropathological subtypes, EEG, neuroimaging and surgical outcome. Brain. 2002;125:1719-32.

22. McBride MC, Bronstein KS, Bennett B, Erba G, Pilcher W, Berg MJ. Failure of standard magnetic resonance imaging in patients with refractory temporal lobe epilepsy. Arch Neurol. 1998;55: 346-8.

23. Nguyen DK, Rochette E, Leroux JM, et al. Value of 3.0 T MR imaging in refractory partial epilepsy and negative 1.5 T MRI. Seizure. 2010;19:475-8.

24. Seeck M. Epilepsy: Repeat MRI in patients with chronic epilepsy. Nat Rev Neurol. 2013;9:545-6.

25. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159-74.