2000
DOI: 10.1097/00004728-200003000-00022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Focal Cortical Dysplasia: Comparison of MRI and FDG-PET

Abstract: FDG-PET is more useful in delineating the cortical abnormality in patients with mild degrees of FCD. The extent of the lesion was larger or similar on FDG-PET compared with that of the MRI.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

4
43
0
2

Year Published

2005
2005
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
4
43
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…28 Like MRI, however, interpretation of grayscale FDG-PET scans is less sensitive for type I compared with type II CD. 15,[29][30][31][32] Furthermore, intracranial EEG ictal onset zones are often diffuse and illdefined in patients with CD. 33,34 Consequently, determining the location and borders of the surgical resection is challenging in CD patients to completely remove the lesion, especially for patients with type I CD, where the area generating seizures often overlaps with functional cortex and the structural brain abnormalities are relatively subtle.…”
Section: Correlations Between Neuroimaging and Clinical Vari-mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…28 Like MRI, however, interpretation of grayscale FDG-PET scans is less sensitive for type I compared with type II CD. 15,[29][30][31][32] Furthermore, intracranial EEG ictal onset zones are often diffuse and illdefined in patients with CD. 33,34 Consequently, determining the location and borders of the surgical resection is challenging in CD patients to completely remove the lesion, especially for patients with type I CD, where the area generating seizures often overlaps with functional cortex and the structural brain abnormalities are relatively subtle.…”
Section: Correlations Between Neuroimaging and Clinical Vari-mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[22][23][24][25] In comparison, FDG-PET can identify FCD despite normal MR imaging findings. 7,26 One study found that MR imaging detected 83% of severe FCD, whereas FDG-PET detected 90%. 26 However, for subtle FCD, MR imaging identified only 13% compared with 86% with FDG-PET.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7,26 One study found that MR imaging detected 83% of severe FCD, whereas FDG-PET detected 90%. 26 However, for subtle FCD, MR imaging identified only 13% compared with 86% with FDG-PET. This suggests that FDG-PET is more sensitive than MR imaging and that it is particularly useful when MR imaging findings are normal.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…3). 37 Findings suggestive of Type II FCDs include focal cortical thickening, blurring of the gray-white matter junction, and T2-weighted hyperintensity of subcortical white matter often tapering toward the ventricle (Fig. 2).…”
Section: Magnetic Resonance Imagingmentioning
confidence: 99%