A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

A Proposed Stereoelectroencephalography Electrode Nomenclature and Call for Standardization. | LitMetric

A Proposed Stereoelectroencephalography Electrode Nomenclature and Call for Standardization.

J Clin Neurophysiol

Department of Neurology, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, U.S.A. Dr. A. Babajani-Feremi now with Department of Neurology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, U.S.A.

Published: June 2024

Introduction: Between 20 and 40% of patients with epilepsy are considered pharmacoresistant. Stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) is frequently used as an invasive method for localizing seizures in patients with pharmacoresistant epilepsy who are surgical candidates; however, electrode nomenclature varies widely across institutions. This lack of standardization can have many downstream consequences, including difficulty with intercenter or intracenter interpretation, communication, and reliability.

Methods: The authors propose a novel sEEG nomenclature that is both intuitive and comprehensive. Considerations include clear/precise entry and target anatomical locations, laterality, distinction of superficial and deep structures, functional mapping, and relative labeling of electrodes in close proximity if needed. Special consideration was also given to electrodes approximating radiographically distinct lesions. The accuracy of electrode identification and the use of correct entry-target labels were assessed by neurosurgeons and epileptologists, not directly involved in each case.

Results: The authors' nomenclature was used in 41 consecutive sEEG cases (497 electrodes total) within their institution. After reconstruction was complete, the accuracy of electrode identification was 100%, and the correct use of entry-target labels was 98%. The last 30 sEEG cases had 100% correct use of entry-target labels.

Conclusions: The proposed sEEG nomenclature demonstrated both high accuracy in electrode identification and consistent use of entry-target labeling. The authors submit this nomenclature as a model for standardization across epilepsy surgery centers. They intend to improve practicability, ease of use, and specificity of this nomenclature through collaboration with other surgical epilepsy centers.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000001103DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

accuracy electrode
12
electrode identification
12
correct entry-target
12
electrode nomenclature
8
seeg nomenclature
8
entry-target labels
8
seeg cases
8
100% correct
8
nomenclature
7
electrode
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!