4.3 Article

Intrinsic hippocampal and thalamic networks in temporal lobe epilepsy with hippocampal sclerosis according to drug response

期刊

SEIZURE-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPILEPSY
卷 76, 期 -, 页码 32-38

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2020.01.010

关键词

Epilepsy; Magnetic resonance imaging; Connectivity

资金

  1. Inje University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate whether intrinsic hippocampal or thalamic networks in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) with hippocampal sclerosis (HS) were different according to antiepileptic drug (AED) response. Methods: We enrolled 80 patients with TLE with HS and 40 healthy controls. Of the patients with TLE with HS, 43 were classified as a drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) group, whereas 37 patients were enrolled as a drug-controlled epilepsy (DCE) group. We investigated the structural connectivity of the global brain, intrinsic hippocampal, and intrinsic thalamic networks based on structural volumes in the patients with DRE and DCE, and analyzed the differences between them. Results: There were significant alterations of the intrinsic hippocampal network compared with healthy controls. The average degree and the global efficiency were decreased, whereas the characteristic path length was increased in the patients with DRE compared with those in healthy controls. In the patients with DCE, only the small-worldness index was decreased compared with healthy controls. Compared to the patients with DCE, the mean clustering coefficient was increased in the patients with DRE. Conclusion: We found that the intrinsic hippocampal network in patients with TLE with HS was different according to AED response. The patients with DRE had more severe disruptions of the intrinsic hippocampal network than those with DCE compared with healthy controls. These findings suggested that the hippocampal network might be related to AED response and could be a new biomarker of medical outcome in patients with TLE with HS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据