Donos Cristian, Mîndruţă Ioana, Malîia Mihai Dragoş, Raşină Alin, Ciurea Jean, Barborica Andrei
Physics Department, University of Bucharest, Str. Atomistilor 405, Magurele, Jud. Ilfov CP MG-11, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania; Epilepsy Center, University Hospital of Freiburg, Breisacher Str. 64, Freiburg, Germany.
Neurology Department, University Emergency Hospital, Splaiul Independentei 169, Bucharest, Romania; Neurology Department, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Blvd. Eroii Sanitari 8, Bucharest, Romania.
Clin Neurophysiol. 2017 Jun;128(6):1043-1052. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2016.11.028. Epub 2016 Dec 18.
To perform a side-by-side comparison of two epileptogenicity biomarkers, high frequency oscillations (HFOs) and delayed responses (DRs), as a result of single-pulse electrical stimulation.
We have recorded stimulation-evoked HFOs and DRs in 16 epileptic patients undergoing presurgical evaluation using the stereoelectroencephalographic method. To evaluate converging and complementary information provided by the biomarkers, we analyzed them individually and for logical "and"/"or" combinations between them. 3D maps of the biomarkers' distributions by recording location (inbound maps) and by stimulation location (outbound maps) were created to analyze their relationship with the epileptogenic structures.
HFOs occur less frequently than DRs, by 18.7%, when counting by recording contacts, and more frequently, by 7.4%, when counting by stimulation contacts. 40.6% of the contacts exhibiting HFOs also exhibit DRs, and 44.1% of the contacts exhibiting DRs also exhibit HFOs. When combining biomarkers, there was a tradeoff between increased seizure onset zone (SOZ) sensitivity, from 21.3% to 73%, and decreased specificity, from 87.2% to 34.3%.
There is a moderate similarity in the information provided by the DRs and HFOs.
The biomarkers complement each other, but there is a tradeoff between different metrics for SOZ localization.
对单脉冲电刺激产生的两种致痫生物标志物——高频振荡（HFOs）和延迟反应（DRs）进行并行比较。
我们使用立体脑电图方法，记录了16例接受术前评估的癫痫患者的刺激诱发HFOs和DRs。为了评估生物标志物提供的汇聚和互补信息，我们分别对它们进行了分析，并分析了它们之间逻辑“与”/“或”组合的情况。通过记录位置（入图）和刺激位置（出图）创建了生物标志物分布的三维图，以分析它们与致痫结构的关系。
按记录触点计数时，HFOs出现的频率比DRs低18.7%，而按刺激触点计数时，HFOs出现的频率比DRs高7.4%。表现出HFOs的触点中有40.6%也表现出DRs，表现出DRs的触点中有44.1%也表现出HFOs。当组合生物标志物时，癫痫发作起始区（SOZ）敏感性从21.3%提高到73%，但特异性从87.2%降低到34.3%，二者之间存在权衡。
DRs和HFOs提供的信息存在中等程度的相似性。
生物标志物相互补充，但在SOZ定位的不同指标之间存在权衡。
