We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Language mapping using high gamma electrocorticography, fMRI, and TMS versus electrocortical stimulation.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to compare localization of the language cortex using cortical stimulation mapping (CSM), high gamma electrocorticography (hgECoG), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS).
METHODS: Language mapping using CSM, hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS were compared in nine patients with epilepsy. Considering CSM as reference, we compared language mapping approaches based on hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS using their sensitivity, specificity, and the results of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses.
RESULTS: Our results show that areas involved in language processing can be identified by hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS. The average sensitivity/specificity of hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS across all patients was 100%/85%, 50%/80%, and 67%/66%, respectively. The average area under the ROC curve of hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS across CSM-positive patients was 0.98, 0.76, and 0.68, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable concordance between CSM, hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS language mapping. Our results reveal that hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS are valuable tools for presurgical language mapping.
SIGNIFICANCE: Language mapping on the basis of hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS can provide important additional information, therefore, these methods can be used in conjunction with CSM or as an alternative, when the latter is deemed impractical.
METHODS: Language mapping using CSM, hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS were compared in nine patients with epilepsy. Considering CSM as reference, we compared language mapping approaches based on hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS using their sensitivity, specificity, and the results of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses.
RESULTS: Our results show that areas involved in language processing can be identified by hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS. The average sensitivity/specificity of hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS across all patients was 100%/85%, 50%/80%, and 67%/66%, respectively. The average area under the ROC curve of hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS across CSM-positive patients was 0.98, 0.76, and 0.68, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable concordance between CSM, hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS language mapping. Our results reveal that hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS are valuable tools for presurgical language mapping.
SIGNIFICANCE: Language mapping on the basis of hgECoG, fMRI, and TMS can provide important additional information, therefore, these methods can be used in conjunction with CSM or as an alternative, when the latter is deemed impractical.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app