The Sixth Sense: How Much Does Interictal Intracranial EEG Add to Determining the Focality of Epileptic Networks?
Abstract number :
2.42
Submission category :
9. Surgery / 9A. Adult
Year :
2024
Submission ID :
937
Source :
www.aesnet.org
Presentation date :
12/8/2024 12:00:00 AM
Published date :
Authors :
Presenting Author: Nishant Sinha, PhD – University of Pennsylvania
Ryan S Gallagher, MD – University of Pennsylvania
Akash Pattnaik, BS – University of Pennsylvania
William Ojemann, BS – University of Pennsylvania
Alfredo Lucas, PhD – University of Pennsylvania
Joshua J. LaRocque, MD, PhD – University of Pennsylvania
John M Bernabei, MD, PhD – University of Pennsylvania
Adam S Greenblatt, PhD – University of Pennsylvania
Elizabeth M Sweeney, PhD – University of Pennsylvania
Iahn Cajigas, MD, PhD – University of Pennsylvania
H. Isaac Chen, MD – Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania
Kathryn Davis, MD – University of Pennsylvania
Erin Conrad, MD – University of Pennsylvania
Brian Litt, MD – University of Pennsylvania
Rationale: Intracranial EEG (IEEG) is used for two main purposes: to determine (1) if epileptic networks are amenable to focal treatment and (2) where to intervene. Currently, these questions are answered qualitatively and differently across centers. There is a need to quantify the focality of epileptic networks systematically, which may guide surgical decision-making, enable large-scale data analysis, and facilitate multi-center prospective clinical trials.
Methods: We analyzed interictal data from 101 patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who underwent presurgical evaluation with IEEG. We chose interictal data because of its potential to reduce the morbidity and cost associated with ictal recording. 65 patients had unifocal seizure onset on IEEG, and 36 were non-focal or multi-focal. We quantified the spatial dispersion of implanted electrodes and interictal IEEG abnormalities for each patient. We compared these measures against the “5 Sense Score (5SS),” a pre-implant prediction of the likelihood of focal seizure onset, assessed the ability to predict unifocal seizure onset by combining these metrics, and evaluated how predicted focality relates to subsequent treatment and outcomes.
Results: The spatial dispersion of IEEG electrodes predicted network focality with similar precision to the 5SS (AUC = 0.68 [95%CI 0.57, 0.78]), indicating that electrode placement accurately reflected pre-implant information. A cross-validated model combining the 5SS and the spatial dispersion of interictal IEEG abnormalities significantly improved this prediction (AUC = 0.79 [95%CI 0.70, 0.88]; p< 0.05). Predictions from this combined model differed between surgical- from device-treated patients with an AUC of 0.81 [95%CI 0.68, 0.85] and between patients with good and poor post-surgical outcome at two years with an AUC of 0.70 [95%CI 0.56, 0.85].
Surgery