4.3 Article

Value of 3.0 T MR imaging in refractory partial epilepsy and negative 1.5 T MRI

Journal

SEIZURE-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPILEPSY
Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages 475-478

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2010.07.002

Keywords

Focal epilepsy; Refractory epilepsy; Magnetic resonance imaging; 3.0 T vs 1.5 T

Funding

  1. Fonds pour la Recherche en Sante du Quebec

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: High-field 3.0 T MR scanners provide an improved signal-to-noise ratio which can be translated in higher image resolution, possibly allowing critical detection of subtle epileptogenic lesions missed on standard-field 1.0-1.5 T MRIs. In this study, the authors explore the potential value of re-imaging at 3.0 T patients with refractory partial epilepsy and negative 1.5 T MRI. Methods: We retrospectively identified all patients with refractory partial epilepsy candidate for surgery who had undergone a 3.0 T MR study after a negative 1.5 T MR study. High-field 3.0 T MRIs were reviewed qualitatively by neuroradiologists experienced in interpreting epilepsy studies with access to clinical information. Relevance and impact on clinical management were assessed by an epileptologist. Results: Between November 2006 and August 2009, 36 patients with refractory partial epilepsy candidate for surgery underwent 3.0 T MR study after a 1.5 T MR study failed to disclose a relevant epileptogenic lesion. A potential lesion was found only in two patients (5.6%, 95% CI: 1.5-18.1%). Both were found to have hippocampal atrophy congruent with other presurgical localization techniques which resulted in omission of an invasive EEG study and direct passage to surgery. Conclusions: The frequency of detection of a new lesion by re-imaging at 3.0 T patients with refractory partial epilepsy candidate for surgery was found to be low, but seems to offer the potential of a significant clinical impact for selected patients. This finding needs to be validated in a prospective controlled study. (C) 2010 British Epilepsy Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available