Dissociation of action and object naming: Evidence from cortical stimulation mapping

Corina, David P.; Gibson, Edward S.; Martin, R. F.; Poliakov, Andrew; Brinkley, James F.; Ojemann, George A.

doi:10.1002/hbm.20063

Cited by 115 publications

(125 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

111

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…47 Different localization has also been observed for noun versus verb naming, though the exact locations varied in individual subjects. 17 Specific functions can also be determined when essential sites identified with picture naming are compared with other tasks such as counting and reading. For example, posterior STG stimulation can cause speech arrest for all of these tasks, suggesting its potential role in the final pathway for temporal lobe speech planning before motor commands are executed in the frontal lobe.…”

Section: Intraoperative Cortical Mappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemporary model of language organization: an overview for neurosurgeons

Chang¹,

Raygor²,

Berger³

2015

JNS

330

285

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he pursuit of defining how the human brain processes language is one of the greatest challenges in neuroscience. Pierre Broca and Karl Wernicke made fundamental contributions at a time when the practice of localization by phrenology was pervasive. Their careful studies were some of the first to define functional localization in the brain by studying patients with defined brain injuries and lesions. Over time, their names have become synonymous with two key brain areas for language function: the inferior frontal gyrus and superior posterior temporal area, respectively. The brain regions that bear their names are now universal in every medical student's education. However, the dichotomy of language production based in the frontal lobe and language comprehension based in the temporal lobe is a commonly oversimplified interpretation of their work. For example, injuries to Wernicke's area result in abnormal speech production in addition to deficits in comprehension. Frontal lesions can also result in higherorder comprehension deficits. Thus, the language network is more complicated and integrated than commonly appreciated. In the last 15 years, an exponential increase in the number of studies on the neurobiology of language has improved our understanding of potential mechanisms, but many fundamental questions remain unresolved.Our goal in this overview is to provide an update to neurosurgeons by comparing classic with more recent models of language organization. It is not meant to be an exhaustive review of language research, which is beyond our intended scope, but rather to introduce contemporary theories and briefly review selected neurosurgical experience with stimulation-based language mapping. This will abbreviatioNs DTI = diffusion tensor imaging; fMRI = functional MRI; IFOF = inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus; MTG = middle temporal gyrus; PVWM = periventricular white matter; SLF = superior longitudinal fasciculus; SMA = supplementary motor area; STG = superior temporal gyrus; STS = superior temporal sulcus. Classic models of language organization posited that separate motor and sensory language foci existed in the inferior frontal gyrus (Broca's area) and superior temporal gyrus (Wernicke's area), respectively, and that connections between these sites (arcuate fasciculus) allowed for auditory-motor interaction. These theories have predominated for more than a century, but advances in neuroimaging and stimulation mapping have provided a more detailed description of the functional neuroanatomy of language. New insights have shaped modern network-based models of speech processing composed of parallel and interconnected streams involving both cortical and subcortical areas. Recent models emphasize processing in "dorsal" and "ventral" pathways, mediating phonological and semantic processing, respectively. Phonological processing occurs along a dorsal pathway, from the posterosuperior temporal to the inferior frontal cortices. On the other hand, semantic information is carried in a ventral pathway that runs fro...

show abstract

Section: Intraoperative Cortical Mappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemporary model of language organization: an overview for neurosurgeons

Chang¹,

Raygor²,

Berger³

2015

JNS

330

285

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…37,40,51 After the video analysis, the detected language errors sorted by error type were assigned to the cortical parcellation system (CPS) as published by Corina et al 8 Figure 1A shows the CPS, including the abbreviations of the mapped cortical regions. The abbreviations are further explained in Table 2.…”

Section: Tms Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1A). 8 First, the positive and negative language sites of the intraoperative mapping by DCS were assigned to the CPS. The stimulated sites, then transferred to the neuronavigation system by the navigation pointer, could be located exactly in a 3D environment for further analysis.…”

Section: Anatomical Localizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined noninvasive language mapping by navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation and functional MRI and its comparison with direct cortical stimulation

Ille

Sollmann

Hauck

et al. 2015

JNS

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he resection of tumors within or adjacent to language-eloquent brain regions is still a neurosurgical quest, and a profound presurgical workup is crucial to achieving the best functional and oncological result. 6,71 Today, the most precise way to localize individual language-eloquent regions is direct cortical stimulation (DCS) during awake craniotomy. 9,12,26,44,45,54,62,65,74 Using only DCS, however, we cannot provide the longitudinal abbreviatioNs BOLD = blood oxygen level-dependent; CPS = cortical parcellation system; DCS direct cortical stimulation; ER = error rate; ERT error rate threshold; fMRI = functional MRI; IPI = interpicture interval; NPV = negative predictive value; nTMS navigated TMS; PPV = positive predictive value; PTI = picture-to-trigger interval; RMT = resting motor threshold; ROC = receiver operating characteristic; rTMS repetitive navigated TMS; TMS = transcranial magnetic stimulation. obJect Repetitive navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is now increasingly used for preoperative language mapping in patients with lesions in language-related areas of the brain. Yet its correlation with intraoperative direct cortical stimulation (DCS) has to be improved. To increase rTMS's specificity and positive predictive value, the authors aim to provide thresholds for rTMS's positive language areas. Moreover, they propose a protocol for combining rTMS with functional MRI (fMRI) to combine the strength of both methods. methods The authors performed multimodal language mapping in 35 patients with left-sided perisylvian lesions by using rTMS, fMRI, and DCS. The rTMS mappings were conducted with a picture-to-trigger interval (PTI, time between stimulus presentation and stimulation onset) of either 0 or 300 msec. The error rates (ERs; that is, the number of errors per number of stimulations) were calculated for each region of the cortical parcellation system (CPS). Subsequently, the rTMS mappings were analyzed through different error rate thresholds (ERT; that is, the ER at which a CPS region was defined as language positive in terms of rTMS), and the 2-out-of-3 rule (a stimulation site was defined as language positive in terms of rTMS if at least 2 out of 3 stimulations caused an error). As a second step, the authors combined the results of fMRI and rTMS in a predefined protocol of combined noninvasive mapping. To validate this noninvasive protocol, they correlated its results to DCS during awake surgery. results The analysis by different rTMS ERTs obtained the highest correlation regarding sensitivity and a low rate of false positives for the ERTs of 15%, 20%, 25%, and the 2-out-of-3 rule. However, when comparing the combined fMRI and rTMS results with DCS, the authors observed an overall specificity of 83%, a positive predictive value of 51%, a sensitivity of 98%, and a negative predictive value of 95%. coNclusioNs In comparison with fMRI, rTMS is a more sensitive but less specific tool for preoperative language mapping than DCS. Moreover, rTMS is most reliable when using ERTs of 15%, 20...

show abstract

“…1, Table 2). 6 Moreover, the definition of anterior (A) and posterior (P) language-related CPS regions is provided in Fig. 1.…”

Section: Tms Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 Given that DCS represents the gold standard for language mapping, the intraoperative results determined by DCS provided the ground truth for every comparison. The assertion regarding language positivity or negativity of a CPS region defined by the noninvasive techniques of rTMS and fMRI was compared with the results of DCS language mapping as fol- Table 2.…”

Section: Anatomical Localization and Stimulation Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impairment of preoperative language mapping by lesion location: a functional magnetic resonance imaging, navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation, and direct cortical stimulation study

Ille¹,

Sollmann²,

Hauck³

et al. 2015

JNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was introduced for stimulating the human motor cortex by Barker et al. in 1985, the method has become more sophisticated and was extensively refined.1 PascualLeone and colleagues introduced the term "virtual lesion" and were already in 1991 able to induce speech arrests and counting errors by the use of rapid-rate TMS. 35,36 In the late 1990s and early 2000s, a combination of TMS with optically tracked stereotactic navigation systems was established, whereby it was possible to visualize the stimulation sites via the 3D reconstructed MRI data of the patient's brain. 31,37 Thus, the door to the operating theater was opened since the recorded and analyzed stimulation sites could be used for presurgical planning and data could be abbreviatioNs BOLD = blood-oxygen-level dependent; CPS = cortical parcellation system; DCS = direct cortical stimulation; DTI-FT = diffusion tensor imaging fiber tracking; fMRI = functional MRI; NPV = negative predictive value; PPV = positive predictive value; PTI = picture-to-trigger interval; RMT = resting motor threshold; ROC = receiver operating characteristic; rTMS = repetitive navigated TMS; TMS = transcranial magnetic stimulation. (rTMS) is increasingly used and has already replaced functional MRI (fMRI) in some institutions for preoperative mapping of neurosurgical patients. Yet some factors affect the concordance of both methods with direct cortical stimulation (DCS), most likely by lesions affecting cortical oxygenation levels. Therefore, the impairment of the accuracy of rTMS and fMRI was analyzed and compared with DCS during awake surgery in patients with intraparenchymal lesions. methods Language mapping was performed by DCS, rTMS, and fMRI using an object-naming task in 27 patients with left-sided perisylvian lesions, and the induced language errors of each method were assigned to the cortical parcellation system. Subsequently, the receiver operating characteristics were calculated for rTMS and fMRI and compared with DCS as ground truth for regions with (w/) and without (w/o) the lesion in the mapped regions. results The w/ subgroup revealed a sensitivity of 100% (w/o 100%), a specificity of 8% (w/o 5%), a positive predictive value of 34% (w/o: 53%), and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% (w/o: 100%) for the comparison of rTMS versus DCS. Findings for the comparison of fMRI versus DCS within the w/ subgroup revealed a sensitivity of 32% (w/o: 62%), a specificity of 88% (w/o: 60%), a positive predictive value of 56% (w/o: 62%), and a NPV of 73% (w/o: 60%). coNclusioNs Although strengths and weaknesses exist for both rTMS and fMRI, the results show that rTMS is less affected by a brain lesion than fMRI, especially when performing mapping of language-negative cortical regions based on sensitivity and NPV.

show abstract

Dissociation of action and object naming: Evidence from cortical stimulation mapping

Cited by 115 publications

References 35 publications

Contemporary model of language organization: an overview for neurosurgeons

Contemporary model of language organization: an overview for neurosurgeons

Combined noninvasive language mapping by navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation and functional MRI and its comparison with direct cortical stimulation

Impairment of preoperative language mapping by lesion location: a functional magnetic resonance imaging, navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation, and direct cortical stimulation study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About