No abstract

Distributed inverse solutions aim to realistically reconstruct the origin of interictal epileptic discharges (IEDs) from noninvasively recorded electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) signals. Our aim was to compare the performance of different distributed inverse solutions in localizing IEDs: coherent maximum entropy on the mean (cMEM), hierarchical Bayesian implementations of independent identically distributed sources (IID, minimum norm prior) and spatially coherent sources (COH, spatial smoothness prior). Source maxima (i.e., the vertex with the maximum source amplitude) of IEDs in 14 EEG and 19 MEG studies from 15 patients with focal epilepsy were analyzed. We visually compared their concordance with intracranial EEG (iEEG) based on 17 cortical regions of interest and their spatial dispersion around source maxima. Magnetic source imaging (MSI) maxima from cMEM were most often confirmed by iEEG (cMEM: 14/19, COH: 9/19, IID: 8/19 studies). COH electric source imaging (ESI) maxima co-localized best with iEEG (cMEM: 8/14, COH: 11/14, IID: 10/14 studies). In addition, cMEM was less spatially spread than COH and IID for ESI and MSI (p < 0.001 Bonferroni-corrected post hoc t test). Highest positive predictive values for cortical regions with IEDs in iEEG could be obtained with cMEM for MSI and with COH for ESI. Additional realistic EEG/MEG simulations confirmed our findings. Accurate spatially extended sources, as found in cMEM (ESI and MSI) and COH (ESI) are desirable for source imaging of IEDs because this might influence surgical decision. Our simulations suggest that COH and IID overestimate the spatial extent of the generators compared to cMEM.

We present a framework to detect fast oscillations (FOs) in magnetoencephalography (MEG) and to perform magnetic source imaging (MSI) to determine the location and extent of their generators in the cortex. FOs can be of physiologic origin associated to sensory processing and memory consolidation. In epilepsy, FOs are of pathologic origin and biomarkers of the epileptogenic zone. Seventeen patients with focal epilepsy previously confirmed with identified FOs in scalp electroencephalography (EEG) were evaluated. To handle data deriving from large number of sensors (275 axial gradiometers) we used an automatic detector with high sensitivity. False positives were discarded by two human experts. MSI of the FOs was performed with the wavelet based maximum entropy on the mean method. We found FOs in 11/17 patients, in only one patient the channel with highest FO rate was not concordant with the epileptogenic region and might correspond to physiologic oscillations. MEG FOs rates were very low: 0.02–4.55 per minute. Compared to scalp EEG, detection sensitivity was lower, but the specificity higher in MEG. MSI of FOs showed concordance or partial concordance with proven generators of seizures and epileptiform activity in 10/11 patients. We have validated the proposed framework for the non-invasive study of FOs with MEG. The excellent overall concordance with other clinical gold standard evaluation tools indicates that MEG FOs can provide relevant information to guide implantation for intracranial EEG pre-surgical evaluation and for surgical treatment, and demonstrates the important added value of choosing appropriate FOs detection and source localization methods.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10548-016-0471-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

wMEM allows non-invasive localization of the SOZ from ictal MEG and EEG. MSI-SOZ performs better than ESI-SOZ. MSI/ESI-SOZ can provide important additional information to MSI/ESI-Spikes during presurgical evaluation. Hum Brain Mapp 37:2528-2546, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Objective: Source localization of interictal epileptic discharges (IEDs) is clinically useful in the presurgical workup of epilepsy patients. It is usually obtained by equivalent current dipole (ECD) which localizes a point source and is the only inverse solution approved by clinical guidelines. In contrast, magnetic source imaging using distributed methods (dMSI) provides maps of the location and the extent of the generators, but its yield has not been clinically validated. We systematically compared ECD versus dMSI performed using coherent Maximum Entropy on the Mean (cMEM), a method sensitive to the spatial extent of the generators. Methods: 340 source localizations of IEDs derived from 49 focal epilepsy patients with foci well-defined through intracranial EEG, MRI lesions, and surgery were analyzed. The comparison was based on the assessment of the sublobar concordance with the focus and of the distance between the source and the focus. Results: dMSI sublobar concordance was significantly higher than ECD (81% vs 69%, P < 0.001), especially for extratemporal lobe sources (dMSI 5 84%; ECD 5 67%, P < 0.001) and for seizure free patients (dMSI 5 83%; ECD 5 70%, P < 0.001). The median distance from the focus was 4.88 mm for ECD and 3.44 mm for dMSI (P < 0.001). ECD dipoles were often wrongly localized in deep brain regions. Conclusions: dMSI using cMEM exhibited better accuracy. dMSI also offered the advantage of recovering more realistic maps of the generator, which could be exploited for neuronavigation aimed at targeting invasive EEG and surgical resection. Therefore, dMSI may be preferred to ECD in clinical practice. Hum Brain Mapp 39:218-231, 2018.V C 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The purpose of this study is to develop and quantitatively assess whether fusion of EEG and MEG (MEEG) data within the maximum entropy on the mean (MEM) framework increases the spatial accuracy of source localization, by yielding better recovery of the spatial extent and propagation pathway of the underlying generators of inter-ictal epileptic discharges (IEDs). The key element in this study is the integration of the complementary information from EEG and MEG data within the MEM framework. MEEG was compared with EEG and MEG when localizing single transient IEDs. The fusion approach was evaluated using realistic simulation models involving one or two spatially extended sources mimicking propagation patterns of IEDs. We also assessed the impact of the number of EEG electrodes required for an efficient EEG–MEG fusion. MEM was compared with minimum norm estimate, dynamic statistical parametric mapping, and standardized low-resolution electromagnetic tomography. The fusion approach was finally assessed on real epileptic data recorded from two patients showing IEDs simultaneously in EEG and MEG. Overall the localization of MEEG data using MEM provided better recovery of the source spatial extent, more sensitivity to the source depth and more accurate detection of the onset and propagation of IEDs than EEG or MEG alone. MEM was more accurate than the other methods. MEEG proved more robust than EEG and MEG for single IED localization in low signal-to-noise ratio conditions. We also showed that only few EEG electrodes are required to bring additional relevant information to MEG during MEM fusion. Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10548-015-0437-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

As the results of BOLD, ESI and MSI are often concordant, they reinforce our confidence in all of them. ESI and MSI confirm the most significant BOLD cluster within BOLD maps, emphasizing the importance of these clusters for the definition of the epileptic focus.

Source localization of interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs) is clinically useful in the presurgical workup of epilepsy patients. We aimed to compare the performance of four different distributed magnetic source imaging (dMSI) approaches: Minimum norm estimate (MNE), dynamic statistical parametric mapping (dSPM), standardized low‐resolution electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA), and coherent maximum entropy on the mean (cMEM). We also evaluated whether a simple average of maps obtained from multiple inverse solutions (Ave) can improve localization accuracy. We analyzed dMSI of 206 IEDs derived from magnetoencephalography recordings in 28 focal epilepsy patients who had a well‐defined focus determined through intracranial EEG (iEEG), epileptogenic MRI lesions or surgical resection. dMSI accuracy and spatial properties were quantitatively estimated as: (a) distance from the epilepsy focus, (b) reproducibility, (c) spatial dispersion (SD), (d) map extension, and (e) effect of thresholding on map properties. Clinical performance was excellent for all methods (median distance from the focus MNE = 2.4 mm; sLORETA = 3.5 mm; cMEM = 3.5 mm; dSPM = 6.8 mm, Ave = 0 mm). Ave showed the lowest distance between the map maximum and epilepsy focus (Dmin lower than cMEM, MNE, and dSPM, p = .021, p = .008, p < .001, respectively). cMEM showed the best spatial features, with lowest SD outside the focus (SD lower than all other methods, p < .001 consistently) and high contrast between the generator and surrounding regions. The average map Ave provided the best localization accuracy, whereas cMEM exhibited the lowest amount of spurious distant activity. dMSI techniques have the potential to significantly improve identification of iEEG targets and to guide surgical planning, especially when multiple methods are combined.