Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, UMC Utrecht Brain Center, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Epilepsia Open. 2024 Aug;9(4):1300-1310. doi: 10.1002/epi4.12953. Epub 2024 May 3.
Ictal SPECT can be used as an estimate for the epileptogenic zone in people with focal epilepsy. Subtraction of ictal and interictal SPECT scans reveals the area with significant ictal hyperperfusion. Some methods use a control database to also correct for physiological variance. This control database is ideally scanner specific, but it is not trivial to obtain such a database because of ethical issues. In this study, we used a publicly available control database to compare ictal-interictal SPECT analyzed by SPM (ISAS) with the most commonly used subtraction ictal SPECT co-registered to MRI (SISCOM).
Ictal and interictal SPECTs of 26 patients (age range: 7-50 years, 15 adults, 11 children) with focal drug resistant epilepsy in workup for epilepsy surgery were retrospectively analyzed using both SISCOM and ISAS. The control database for ISAS was obtained from the ISAS website. Two groups of blinded reviewers determined the location of ictal hyperperfusion in all datasets. Results were compared between subtraction algorithms and with the resected area (if available) or the suspected epileptogenic zone. The number of significant clusters and the locations of maximum hyperperfusion were compared between algorithms.
The location of ISAS and SISCOM hyperperfusion was the same in 14 patients (54%). ISAS localized in 6 patients where SISCOM did not. Compared to the resected area or suspected epileptogenic zone, SISCOM correctly localized in 55%, while ISAS did in 65% (not significantly different). ISAS shows significantly less clusters than SISCOM. The maximum hyperperfusion was in the reviewer's location in 65% for ISAS and 38% for SISCOM.
ISAS using a publicly available control database gives comparable or better results than SISCOM. ISAS results are easier to interpret than SISCOM results. We show that ISAS is a reliable alternative for SISCOM, which could easily be implemented in epilepsy surgery clinics.
We explored the effectiveness of ISAS as an alternative to the widely used SISCOM for assessing SPECT scans in epilepsy surgery candidates. Utilizing a publicly available control database, we compared the two methods in 26 patients. The results indicate that ISAS might offer increased accuracy and interpretability, making it a promising option, especially for centers without access to a specific control dataset.
发作期 SPECT 可用于局灶性癫痫患者致痫区的评估。发作期和发作间期 SPECT 减影可显示发作期显著高灌注区域。一些方法使用控制数据库来校正生理变化。该控制数据库理想情况下是特定于扫描仪的,但由于伦理问题,获得这样的数据库并不简单。在这项研究中,我们使用了一个公开的控制数据库,比较了 SPM(ISAS)分析的发作期-发作间期 SPECT 与最常用的与 MRI 配准的发作期 SPECT 减影(SISCOM)。
回顾性分析了 26 例(年龄范围:7-50 岁,15 例成人,11 例儿童)接受癫痫手术评估的局灶性耐药性癫痫患者的发作期和发作间期 SPECT,使用 SISCOM 和 ISAS 进行分析。ISAS 的控制数据库是从 ISAS 网站获得的。两组盲法审查员确定了所有数据集的发作期高灌注位置。在两种算法之间以及与切除区域(如果有)或可疑致痫区进行了结果比较。比较了算法之间的显著聚类数量和最大高灌注位置。
ISAS 和 SISCOM 高灌注的位置在 14 例患者(54%)中相同。ISAS 在 6 例 SISCOM 未定位的患者中定位。与切除区域或可疑致痫区相比,SISCOM 正确定位的比例为 55%,而 ISAS 为 65%(无显著差异)。ISAS 显示的聚类明显少于 SISCOM。ISAS 的最大高灌注位置在审查员的位置,占 65%,而 SISCOM 为 38%。
使用公开控制数据库的 ISAS 可提供与 SISCOM 相当或更好的结果。ISAS 的结果比 SISCOM 的结果更容易解释。我们表明,ISAS 是 SISCOM 的可靠替代方法,可轻松在癫痫外科诊所实施。