High-Field 7T MRI in a drug-resistant paediatric epilepsy cohort: image comparison and radiological outcomes
Vecchiato, K.; Casella, C.; Dokumaci, A. S.; Carney, O.; Cleary, J. O.; Di Cio, P.; Cleri, M.; Colford, K.; Piper, R. J.; Arichi, T. A.; Eyre, M.; Aitken, F.; Tomi-Tricot, R.; Wilkinson, T.; McGinnity, C. J.; Giles, S. L.; Malik, S.; Hammers, A.; Bridgen, P.; Carmichael, D. W.; O'Muircheartaigh, J.
Show abstract
Background and ObjectivesEpileptogenic lesions in focal epilepsy can be subtle or undetected on conventional brain MRI. Ultra-high field (7T) MRI offers higher spatial resolution, contrast and signal-to-noise ratio compared to conventional imaging systems and has shown promise in the presurgical evaluation of adult focal epilepsy. However, the utility of ultra-high field MRI in paediatric focal epilepsy, where malformations of cortical development are more common, is unclear. This study compared 7T to conventional 3T MRI in children with epilepsy by comparing: (i) scan tolerability; (ii) radiological image quality; (iii) lesion yield. Materials and MethodsChildren with drug-resistant focal epilepsy and healthy controls were recruited prospectively and imaged at both 3T and 7T. Safety and tolerability during scanning was assessed via a questionnaire. Image quality was evaluated by an expert paediatric neuroradiologist and estimated quantitatively by comparing cortical thickness between field strengths. To assess lesion detection yield of 7T MRI, a multi-disciplinary team jointly reviewed patients images. Results41 patients (8-17 years, mean=12.6 years, 22 male) and 22 healthy controls (8-17 years, mean=11.7 years, 15 male) were recruited. All children completed the scan, with no significant adverse events. Higher discomfort due to dizziness was reported at 7T (p=0.02), with side-effects more frequently noted in younger children (p=0.02). However, both field strengths were generally well-tolerated and side-effects were transient. 7T images had increased inhomogeneity and artefacts compared to those obtained at 3T. Cortical thickness measurements were significantly thinner at 7T (p<0.001). 8/26 (31%) patients had new lesions identified at 7T which were not identified at 3T, influencing the surgical management in 4/26 (15%). Discussion7T MRI in children with epilepsy is feasible, well-tolerated and is associated with a 31% improvement in lesion detection rates.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Effects of spatial sampling on network alterations in idiopathic generalized epilepsy. Can routine EEG be enough? 94%
- Blinded study: prospectively defined high frequency oscillations predict seizure outcome in individual patients 94%
- Interictal waking and sleep electrophysiological properties of the thalamus in focal epilepsies 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Widespread, depth-dependent cortical microstructure alterations in paediatric focal epilepsy 95%
- Thalamocortical structural connectivity in children with focal epilepsy: a diffusion MRI, case-control study 94%
- Ablation of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Hyperintensity Clusters and Mesial Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Improves Seizure Outcomes after Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Histological correlates of hippocampal magnetization transfer images in drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy patients 95%
- The Role of the Temporal Pole in Temporal Lobe Epilepsy: A Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging Study 94%
- Portable, Low-Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sensitively Detects and Accurately Quantifies Multiple Sclerosis Lesions 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Probabilistic comparison of gray and white matter coverage between depth and surface intracranial electrodes in epilepsy: a patient-specific modeling and empirical study 93%
- Functional Network Connectivity Imprint In Febrile Seizures 93%
- Non-invasively measured brain activity and radiological progression in diffuse glioma 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.