Purpose To assess current clinical practices throughout Europe with respect to acquisition, implementation, evaluation, and interpretation of language functional MRI (fMRI) in epilepsy patients. Methods An online survey was emailed to all European Society of Neuroradiology members (n = 1662), known associates (n = 6400), and 64 members of European Epilepsy network. The questionnaire featured 40 individual items on demographic data, clinical practice and indications, fMRI paradigms, radiological workflow, data post-processing protocol, and reporting. Results A total of 49 non-duplicate entries from European centers were received from 20 countries. Of these, 73.5% were board-certified neuroradiologists and 69.4% had an in-house epilepsy surgery program. Seventy-one percent of centers performed fewer than five scans per month for epilepsy. The most frequently used paradigms were phonemic verbal fluency (47.7%) and auditory comprehension (55.6%), but variants of 13 paradigms were described. Most centers assessed the fMRI task performance (75.5%), ensured cognitive-task adjustment (77.6%), trained the patient before scanning (85.7%), and assessed handedness (77.6%), but only 28.6% had special paradigms for patients with cognitive impairments. fMRI was post-processed mainly by neuroradiologists (42.1%), using open-source software (55.0%). Reporting was done primarily by neuroradiologists (74.2%). Interpretation was done mainly by visual inspection (65.3%). Most specialists (81.6%) were able to determine the hemisphere dominance for language in more than 75% of exams, attributing failure to the patient not performing the task correctly. Conclusion This survey shows that language fMRI is firmly embedded in the preoperative management of epilepsy patients. The wide variety of paradigms and the use of non-CE-marked software underline the need for establishing reference standards.

Clinical practice of language fMRI in epilepsy centers: a European survey and conclusions by the ESNR Epilepsy Working Group

Rosazza, C;
2020

Abstract

Purpose To assess current clinical practices throughout Europe with respect to acquisition, implementation, evaluation, and interpretation of language functional MRI (fMRI) in epilepsy patients. Methods An online survey was emailed to all European Society of Neuroradiology members (n = 1662), known associates (n = 6400), and 64 members of European Epilepsy network. The questionnaire featured 40 individual items on demographic data, clinical practice and indications, fMRI paradigms, radiological workflow, data post-processing protocol, and reporting. Results A total of 49 non-duplicate entries from European centers were received from 20 countries. Of these, 73.5% were board-certified neuroradiologists and 69.4% had an in-house epilepsy surgery program. Seventy-one percent of centers performed fewer than five scans per month for epilepsy. The most frequently used paradigms were phonemic verbal fluency (47.7%) and auditory comprehension (55.6%), but variants of 13 paradigms were described. Most centers assessed the fMRI task performance (75.5%), ensured cognitive-task adjustment (77.6%), trained the patient before scanning (85.7%), and assessed handedness (77.6%), but only 28.6% had special paradigms for patients with cognitive impairments. fMRI was post-processed mainly by neuroradiologists (42.1%), using open-source software (55.0%). Reporting was done primarily by neuroradiologists (74.2%). Interpretation was done mainly by visual inspection (65.3%). Most specialists (81.6%) were able to determine the hemisphere dominance for language in more than 75% of exams, attributing failure to the patient not performing the task correctly. Conclusion This survey shows that language fMRI is firmly embedded in the preoperative management of epilepsy patients. The wide variety of paradigms and the use of non-CE-marked software underline the need for establishing reference standards.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11576/2676793
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 10
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 10
social impact