Ko D Y, Kufta C, Scaffidi D, Sato S
EEG Section and Epilepsy Research Branch, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Neurosurgery. 1998 Feb;42(2):414-21; discussion 421-2. doi: 10.1097/00006123-199802000-00142.
Source modeling by magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electroencephalography (EEG) may be useful techniques for noninvasive localization of epileptogenic zones for surgery in patients with partial seizures.
Simultaneous recordings of MEG and EEG, obtained in two patients, were coregistered on each patient's magnetic resonance image for direct comparison of these two methods with intracranial electrocorticography.
The average difference between MEG and EEG for localization of the same interictal spikes was approximately 2 cm in one patient and 3.8 cm in the other patient. One patient experienced a complex partial seizure during testing, which permitted comparison between interictal and ictal source localization by both MEG and EEG. The EEG ictal localization differed from the interictal one, whereas the MEG ictal and interictal localizations were more similar. In this patient, the MEG interictal source seemed to localize close to the ictal source, whereas EEG did not. The patients underwent temporal lobectomy after electrocorticography, and the results were compared with the findings of MEG and EEG. Although the results of both techniques agreed with the findings of electrocorticography, in one patient the MEG localization seemed to be more accurate. Both patients experienced good surgical outcomes.
Both MEG and EEG source localization can add useful and complementary information for epilepsy surgery evaluation. MEG seemed to be more accurate than EEG, especially when comparing interictal versus ictal localization. Further study is needed to evaluate the validity of source localization as useful noninvasive techniques to localize the epileptogenic zone.
通过脑磁图（MEG）和脑电图（EEG）进行源建模可能是用于部分性癫痫发作患者手术中癫痫源区非侵入性定位的有用技术。
在两名患者中同时记录的MEG和EEG，与每位患者的磁共振图像进行配准，以便将这两种方法与颅内皮质脑电图进行直接比较。
在一名患者中，MEG和EEG对同一发作间期棘波定位的平均差异约为2厘米，在另一名患者中为3.8厘米。一名患者在测试期间经历了复杂部分性发作，这使得能够通过MEG和EEG比较发作间期和发作期的源定位。EEG发作期定位与发作间期不同，而MEG发作期和发作间期定位更相似。在该患者中，MEG发作间期源似乎靠近发作期源，而EEG则不然。患者在皮质脑电图检查后接受了颞叶切除术，并将结果与MEG和EEG的结果进行比较。尽管两种技术的结果均与皮质脑电图检查结果一致，但在一名患者中MEG定位似乎更准确。两名患者均取得了良好的手术效果。
MEG和EEG源定位均可为癫痫手术评估提供有用的补充信息。MEG似乎比EEG更准确，尤其是在比较发作间期与发作期定位时。需要进一步研究以评估源定位作为定位癫痫源区的有用非侵入性技术的有效性。
