Language mapping is a key goal in neurosurgical planning. fMRI mapping typically proceeds with a focus on Broca's and Wernicke's areas, although multiple other language‐critical areas are now well‐known. We evaluated whether clinicians could use a novel approach, including clinician‐driven individualized thresholding, to reliably identify six language regions, including Broca's Area, Wernicke's Area (inferior, superior), Exner's Area, Supplementary Speech Area, Angular Gyrus, and Basal Temporal Language Area. We studied 22 epilepsy and tumor patients who received Wada and fMRI (age 36.4[12.5]; Wada language left/right/mixed in 18/3/1). fMRI tasks (two × three tasks) were analyzed by two clinical neuropsychologists who flexibly thresholded and combined these to identify the six regions. The resulting maps were compared to fixed threshold maps. Clinicians generated maps that overlapped significantly, and were highly consistent, when at least one task came from the same set. Cases diverged when clinicians prioritized different language regions or addressed noise differently. Language laterality closely mirrored Wada data (85% accuracy). Activation consistent with all six language regions was consistently identified. In blind review, three external, independent clinicians rated the individualized fMRI language maps as superior to fixed threshold maps; identified the majority of regions significantly more frequently; and judged language laterality to mirror Wada lateralization more often. These data provide initial validation of a novel, clinician‐based approach to localizing language cortex. They also demonstrate clinical fMRI is superior when analyzed by an experienced clinician and that when fMRI data is of low quality judgments of laterality are unreliable and should be withheld. Hum Brain Mapp 38:4239–4255, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The goal of this study was to document current clinical practice and report patient outcomes in presurgical language functional MRI (fMRI) for epilepsy surgery. Epilepsy surgical programs worldwide were surveyed as to the utility, implementation, and efficacy of language fMRI in the clinic; 82 programs responded. Respondents were predominantly from the US (61%) academic programs (85%), and evaluated adults (44%), adults and children (40%), or children only (16%). Nearly all (96%) reported using language fMRI. Surprisingly, fMRI is used to guide surgical margins (44% of programs) as well as language lateralization (100%). Sites using fMRI for localization most often use a distance margin around activation of 10mm. While considered useful, 56% of programs reported at least one instance of disagreement with other measures. Direct brain stimulation typically confirmed fMRI findings (74%) when guiding margins, but instances of unpredicted decline were reported by 17% of programs and unexpected preservation of function by 54%. Programs reporting unexpected decline did not clearly differ from those which did not. Clinicians using fMRI to guide surgical margins do not typically map known language-critical areas beyond Broca’s and Wernicke’s. This initial data shows many clinical teams are confident using fMRI not only for language lateralization but also to guide surgical margins. Reported cases of unexpected language preservation when fMRI activation is resected, and cases of language decline when it is not, emphasize a critical need for further validation. Comprehensive studies comparing commonly-used fMRI paradigms to predict stimulation mapping and post-surgical language decline remain of high importance.

Little is known about how language functional MRI (fMRI) is executed in clinical practice in spite of its widespread use. Here we comprehensively documented its execution in surgical planning in epilepsy. A questionnaire focusing on cognitive design, image acquisition, analysis and interpretation, and practical considerations was developed. Individuals responsible for collecting, analyzing, and interpreting clinical language fMRI data at 63 epilepsy surgical programs responded. The central finding was of marked heterogeneity in all aspects of fMRI. Most programs use multiple tasks, with a fifth routinely using 2, 3, 4, or 5 tasks with a modal run duration of 5 min. Variants of over 15 protocols are in routine use with forms of noun–verb generation, verbal fluency, and semantic decision‐making used most often. Nearly all aspects of data acquisition and analysis vary markedly. Neither of the two best‐validated protocols was used by more than 10% of respondents. Preprocessing steps are broadly consistent across sites, language‐related blood flow is most often identified using general linear modeling (76% of respondents), and statistical thresholding typically varies by patient (79%). The software SPM is most often used. fMRI programs inconsistently include input from experts with all required skills (imaging, cognitive assessment, MR physics, statistical analysis, and brain–behavior relationships). These data highlight marked gaps between the evidence supporting fMRI and its clinical application. Teams performing language fMRI may benefit from evaluating practice with reference to the best‐validated protocols to date and ensuring individuals trained in all aspects of fMRI are involved to optimize patient care.

No abstract

OBJECTIVE Brain tumors located close to the language cortex may distort functional MRI (fMRI)–based estimates of language dominance. The nature of this distortion, and whether this is an artifact of numerous confounders, remains unknown. The authors hypothesized tumor bias based on laterality estimates independent of confounders and that the effects are the greatest for tumors proximal to Broca's area. METHODS To answer this question, the authors reviewed more than 1113 patients who underwent preoperative fMRI to match samples on 11 known confounders (tumor location, size, type, and grade; seizure history; prior neurosurgery; aphasia presence and severity; and patient age, sex, and handedness). The samples included 30 patients with left hemisphere tumors (15 anterior and 15 posterior) and 30 with right hemisphere tumors (15 anterior and 15 posterior), thus totaling 60 patients (25 women; 18 left-handed and 4 ambidextrous; mean age 47 [SD 14.1] years). Importantly, the authors matched not only patients with left and right hemisphere tumors but also those with anterior and posterior tumors. Standard fMRI laterality indices (LIs) were calculated using whole-brain and region of interest (ROI) approaches (Broca's and Wernicke's areas). RESULTS Tumors close to Broca's area in the left hemisphere decreased LIs independently of known confounders. At the whole-brain level, this appeared to reflect a decrease in LI values in patients with left anterior tumors compared with patients with right anterior tumors. ROI analysis replicated these findings. Broca's area LIs were significantly lower (p = 0.02) in patients with left anterior tumors (mean LI 0.28) when compared with patients with right anterior tumors (mean LI 0.70). Changes in Wernicke's area–based LIs did not differ as a function of the tumor hemisphere. Therefore, in patients with left anterior tumors, it is essential to assess language laterality using left posterior ROIs. In all remaining tumor groups (left posterior tumors and right hemisphere tumors), language laterality derived from the anterior language ROI was the most robust measure of language dominance. CONCLUSIONS Patients with tumors close to Broca's area showed more bilateral fMRI language maps independent of known confounders. The authors caution against the assumption that this reduced language laterality suggests no or little risk to language function following tumor resection in the left inferior frontal gyrus. Their results address how to interpret fMRI data for neurosurgical purposes, along with theoretical questions of contralesional functional compensation and disinhibition.

IntroductionBrain surgery in the language dominant hemisphere remains challenging due to unintended post-surgical language deficits, despite using pre-surgical functional magnetic resonance (fMRI) and intraoperative cortical stimulation. Moreover, patients are often recommended not to undergo surgery if the accompanying risk to language appears to be too high. While standard fMRI language mapping protocols may have relatively good predictive value at the group level, they remain sub-optimal on an individual level. The standard tests used typically assess lexico-semantic aspects of language, and they do not accurately reflect the complexity of language either in comprehension or production at the sentence level. Among patients who had left hemisphere language dominance we assessed which tests are best at activating language areas in the brain.MethodWe compared grammar tests (items testing word order in actives and passives, wh-subject and object questions, relativized subject and object clauses and past tense marking) with standard tests (object naming, auditory and visual responsive naming), using pre-operative fMRI. Twenty-five surgical candidates (13 females) participated in this study. Sixteen patients presented with a brain tumor, and nine with epilepsy. All participants underwent two pre-operative fMRI protocols: one including CYCLE-N grammar tests (items testing word order in actives and passives, wh-subject and object questions, relativized subject and object clauses and past tense marking); and a second one with standard fMRI tests (object naming, auditory and visual responsive naming). fMRI activations during performance in both protocols were compared at the group level, as well as in individual candidates.ResultsThe grammar tests generated more volume of activation in the left hemisphere (left/right angular gyrus, right anterior/posterior superior temporal gyrus) and identified additional language regions not shown by the standard tests (e.g., left anterior/posterior supramarginal gyrus). The standard tests produced more activation in left BA 47. Ten participants had more robust activations in the left hemisphere in the grammar tests and two in the standard tests. The grammar tests also elicited substantial activations in the right hemisphere and thus turned out to be superior at identifying both right and left hemisphere contribution to language processing.ConclusionThe grammar tests may be an important addition to the standard pre-operative fMRI testing.

No abstract

Neurosurgery on individuals with lesions around language areas becomes even more complicated when the patient is bilingual. It is thus important to understand the principles that predict the likelihood of convergent versus separate neuroanatomical organization of the first (L1) and the second language (L2) in these individuals. We reviewed all English-language publications on neurosurgical language mapping in bilinguals before January 2020 in three databases (e.g., PubMed). Our search yielded 28 studies with 207 participants. The reviewed data suggest several principles of language organization in bilingual neurosurgical patients: (1) separate cortical areas uniquely dedicated to each language in both anterior and posterior language sites are the rule rather than occasional findings, (2) In cases where there was a convergent neuroanatomical representation for L1 and L2, two factors explained the overlap: an early age of L2 acquisition and a small linguistic distance between L1 and L2 and (3) When L1 and L2 diverged neuroanatomically, more L1-specific sites were identified for early age of L2 acquisition, high L2 proficiency and a larger linguistic distance. This work provides initial evidence-based principles predicting the likelihood of converging versus separate neural representations of L1 and L2 in neurosurgical patients.