Guragain, Hari

Low frequency brain rhythms facilitate communication across large spatial regions in the brain and high frequency rhythms are thought to signify local processing among nearby assemblies. A heavily investigated mode by which these low frequency and high frequency phenomenon interact is phase-amplitude coupling (PAC). This phenomenon has recently shown promise as a novel electrophysiologic biomarker, in a number of neurologic diseases including human epilepsy. In 17 medically refractory epilepsy patients undergoing phase-2 monitoring for the evaluation of surgical resection and in whom temporal depth electrodes were implanted, we investigated the electrophysiologic relationships of PAC in epileptogenic (seizure onset zone or SOZ) and non-epileptogenic tissue (non-SOZ). That this biomarker can differentiate seizure onset zone from non-seizure onset zone has been established with ictal and pre-ictal data, but less so with interictal data. Here we show that this biomarker can differentiate SOZ from non-SOZ interictally and is also a function of interictal epileptiform discharges. We also show a differential level of PAC in slow-wave-sleep relative to NREM1-2 and awake states. Lastly, we show AUROC evaluation of the localization of SOZ is optimal when utilizing beta or alpha phase onto high-gamma or ripple band. The results suggest an elevated PAC may reflect an electrophysiology-based biomarker for abnormal/epileptogenic brain regions.

AbstractObjectiveTo rigorously compare automated atlas‐based and manual tracing hippocampal segmentation for accuracy, repeatability, and clinical acceptability given a relevant range of imaging abnormalities in clinical epilepsy.MethodsForty‐nine patients with hippocampal asymmetry were identified from our institutional radiology database, including two patients with significant anatomic deformations. Manual hippocampal tracing was performed by experienced technologists on 3T MPRAGE images, measuring hippocampal volume up to the tectal plate, excluding the hippocampal tail. The same images were processed using NeuroQuant and FreeSurfer software. Ten subjects underwent repeated manual hippocampal tracings by two additional technologists blinded to previous results to evaluate consistency. Ten patients with two clinical MRI studies had volume measurements repeated using NeuroQuant and FreeSurfer.ResultsFreeSurfer raw volumes were significantly lower than NeuroQuant (P < 0.001, right and left), and hippocampal asymmetry estimates were lower for both automatic methods than manual tracing (P < 0.0001). Differences remained significant after scaling volumes to age, gender, and scanner matched normative percentiles. Volume reproducibility was fair (0.4–0.59) for manual tracing, and excellent (>0.75) for both automated methods. Asymmetry index reproducibility was excellent (>0.75) for manual tracing and FreeSurfer segmentation and fair (0.4–0.59) for NeuroQuant segmentation. Both automatic segmentation methods failed on the two cases with anatomic deformations. Segmentation errors were visually identified in 25 NeuroQuant and 27 FreeSurfer segmentations, and nine (18%) NeuroQuant and six (12%) FreeSurfer errors were judged clinically significant.InterpretationAutomated hippocampal volumes are more reproducible than hand‐traced hippocampal volumes. However, these methods fail in some cases, and significant segmentation errors can occur.