Background: Epilepsy is a widespread neurologic disorder and almost one-third of patients suffer from drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). Neuromodulation targeting the centromediannucleus of the thalamus (CM) has been showing promising results for patients with generalized DRE who are not surgical candidates. Recently, the effect of CM- deep brain stimulation (DBS) in DRE patients was investigated in the Electrical Stimulation of Thalamus for Epilepsy of Lennox–Gastaut phenotype (ESTEL) trial, a monocentric randomized-controlled study. The same authors described a ‘cold-spot’ and a ‘sweet-spot’, which are defined as the volume of stimulation in the thalamus yielding the least and the best clinical response, respectively. However, it remains unclear which structural connections may contribute to the anti-seizure effect of the stimulation. Objective: We investigated the differences in structural connectivity among CM, the sweet-spot and the cold-spot. Furthermore, we tried to validate our results in a cohort of DRE patients who underwent CM-DBS or CM-RNS (responsive neurostimulation). We hypothesized that the sweet-spot would share similar structural connectivity with responder patients. Methods: By using the software FMRIB Software Library (FSL), probabilistic tractography was performed on 100 subjects from the Human Connectome Project to calculate the probability of connectivity of the whole CM, the sweet-spot and the cold-spot to 45 cortical and subcortical areas. Results among the three seeds were compared with multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Similarly, the structural connectivity of volumes of tissue activated (VTAs) from eight DRE patients was investigated. Patients were divided into responders and non-responders based on the degree of reduction in seizure frequency, and the mean probabilities of connectivity were similarly compared between the two groups. Results: The sweet-spot demonstrated a significantly higher probability of connectivity ( p < 0.001) with the precentral gyrus, superior frontal gyrus, and the cerebellum than the whole CM and the cold-spot. Responder patients displayed a higher probability of connectivity with both ipsilateral ( p = 0.011) and contralateral cerebellum ( p = 0.04) than the non-responders. Conclusion: Cerebellar connections seem to contribute to the beneficial effects of CM-neuromodulation in patients with drug-resistant generalized epilepsy.
Object: To investigate those parameters affecting early and follow-up functional outcomes in patients undergoing resection of meningiomas and to design a dedicated predictive score, the Milan Bio(metric)-Surgical Score (MBSS) is hereby presented. Methods: Patients undergoing transcranial surgery for intracranial meningiomas were included. The most significant parameters in the regression analyses were implemented in a patient stratification score and were validated by testing its classification consistency with a clinical–radiological grading scale (CRGS), Milan complexity scale (MCS), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores. Results: The ASA score, Frailty index, skull base and posterior cranial fossa locations, a diameter of >25 mm, and the absence of a brain–tumour interface were predictive of early post-operative deterioration and were collected in MBSS Part A (AUC: 0.965; 95%C.I. 0.890–1.022), while the frailty index, posterior cranial fossa location, a diameter of >25 mm, a edema/tumour volume index of >2, dural sinus invasion, DWI hyperintensity, and the absence of a brain–tumour interface were predictive of a long-term unfavourable outcome and were collected in MBSS Part B (AUC: 0.877; 95%C.I. 0.811–0.942). The score was consistent with CRGS, MCS, and CCI. Conclusion: Patients’ multi-domain evaluation and the implementation of frailty indexes might help predict the perioperative complexity of cases; the functional, clinical, and neurological early outcomes; survival; and overall QoL after surgery.
(1) Background: Neuroimaging differentiation of glioblastoma, primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) and solitary brain metastasis (BM) represents a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge in neurosurgical practice, expanding the burden of care and exposing patients to additional risks related to further invasive procedures and treatment delays. In addition, atypical cases and overlapping features have not been entirely addressed by modern diagnostic research. The aim of this study was to validate a previously designed and internally validated ResNet101 deep learning model to differentiate glioblastomas, PCNSLs and BMs. (2) Methods: We enrolled 126 patients (glioblastoma: n = 64; PCNSL: n = 27; BM: n = 35) with preoperative T1Gd-MRI scans and histopathological confirmation. Each lesion was segmented, and all regions of interest were exported in a DICOM dataset. A pre-trained ResNet101 deep neural network model implemented in a previous work on 121 patients was externally validated on the current cohort to differentiate glioblastomas, PCNSLs and BMs on T1Gd-MRI scans. (3) Results: The model achieved optimal classification performance in distinguishing PCNSLs (AUC: 0.73; 95%CI: 0.62–0.85), glioblastomas (AUC: 0.78; 95%CI: 0.71–0.87) and moderate to low ability in differentiating BMs (AUC: 0.63; 95%CI: 0.52–0.76). The performance of expert neuro-radiologists on conventional plus advanced MR imaging, assessed by retrospectively reviewing the diagnostic reports of the selected cohort of patients, was found superior in accuracy for BMs (89.69%) and not inferior for PCNSL (82.90%) and glioblastomas (84.09%). (4) Conclusions: We investigated whether the previously published deep learning model was generalizable to an external population recruited at a different institution—this validation confirmed the consistency of the model and laid the groundwork for future clinical applications in brain tumour classification. This artificial intelligence-based model might represent a valuable educational resource and, if largely replicated on prospective data, help physicians differentiate glioblastomas, PCNSL and solitary BMs, especially in settings with limited resources.
26 April 2023 in Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface