Ignite Creation Date:
2024-05-06 @ 12:57 PM
Last Modification Date:
2024-10-26 @ 1:06 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT03893916
Status:
RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2024-01-26
First Post:
2019-03-21
Brief Title:
MEG Versus EEG HR for the Localization of the Epileptogenic Zone as Part of the Pre-surgical Assessment of Epilepsy
Sponsor:
Hospices Civils de Lyon
Organization:
Hospices Civils de Lyon
Study Overview
Official Title:
MEG Versus EEG HR for the Localization of the Epileptogenic Zone as Part of the Pre-surgical Assessment of Epilepsy
Status:
RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2024-01
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
EPIMEEG
Brief Summary:
Drug-resistant partial epilepsies are disabling diseases for which surgical treatment may be indicated The determination of the area to be operated or epileptogenic zone is based on a bundle of clinical arguments and neuroimaging having a direct impact on surgical success
Epileptic patients have electrical abnormalities that can be detected with surface electrophysiological examinations such as surface EEG or MagnetoEncephalography MEG The intracerebral source of these abnormalities can be localized in the brain using source modeling techniques from MEG signals or EEG signals if a sufficient number of electrodes is used 100 so-called high EEG technique Resolution EEG HR EEG HR and MEG are two infrequent state-of-the-art techniques
The independent contribution of EEG HR and MEG for the localization of the epileptogenic zone has been shown in several studies However several modeling studies have shown that MEG and EEG HR have a different detection capacity and spatial resolution depending on the cortical generators studied Modeling studies suggest that MEG has better localization accuracy than EEG for most cortical sources
No direct comparison of the locating value of MEG and EEG HR for the localization of the epileptogenic zone has been performed to date in a large-scale clinical study
In this prospective study 100 patients with partial epilepsy who are candidates for epilepsy surgery and for some of them with intracranial EEG recording will benefit from two advanced electrophysiological examinations including magnetoencephalographic recording MEG interictal electrophysiological abnormalities and high-resolution EEG recording 128 electrodes in addition to the usual examinations performed as part of the pre-surgical assessment prior to cortectomy and or intracranial EEG recording
Based on recent work conducted in humans we postulate
that the MEG and the EEG HR make it possible to precisely determine the epileptogenic zone by using two approaches of definition of the epileptogenic zone zone operated in the cured patients zone at the origin of the crises during the intracranial recordings but that the MEG is a little more precise than the EEG HR for the determination of the epileptogenic zone we will try to highlight a difference of about 10
that the quantitative study of the complementarity between EEG HR and MEG for modeling sources of epileptic spikes will show an added value in the use of both methods compared to the use of only one of the two methods
that it is possible to determine the epileptogenic zone by determining the MEG model zone having the highest centrality value hub within the intercritical network by studying networks using graph theory
Epileptic patients have electrical abnormalities that can be detected with surface electrophysiological examinations such as surface EEG or MagnetoEncephalography MEG The intracerebral source of these abnormalities can be localized in the brain using source modeling techniques from MEG signals or EEG signals if a sufficient number of electrodes is used 100 so-called high EEG technique Resolution EEG HR EEG HR and MEG are two infrequent state-of-the-art techniques
The independent contribution of EEG HR and MEG for the localization of the epileptogenic zone has been shown in several studies However several modeling studies have shown that MEG and EEG HR have a different detection capacity and spatial resolution depending on the cortical generators studied Modeling studies suggest that MEG has better localization accuracy than EEG for most cortical sources
No direct comparison of the locating value of MEG and EEG HR for the localization of the epileptogenic zone has been performed to date in a large-scale clinical study
In this prospective study 100 patients with partial epilepsy who are candidates for epilepsy surgery and for some of them with intracranial EEG recording will benefit from two advanced electrophysiological examinations including magnetoencephalographic recording MEG interictal electrophysiological abnormalities and high-resolution EEG recording 128 electrodes in addition to the usual examinations performed as part of the pre-surgical assessment prior to cortectomy and or intracranial EEG recording
Based on recent work conducted in humans we postulate
that the MEG and the EEG HR make it possible to precisely determine the epileptogenic zone by using two approaches of definition of the epileptogenic zone zone operated in the cured patients zone at the origin of the crises during the intracranial recordings but that the MEG is a little more precise than the EEG HR for the determination of the epileptogenic zone we will try to highlight a difference of about 10
that the quantitative study of the complementarity between EEG HR and MEG for modeling sources of epileptic spikes will show an added value in the use of both methods compared to the use of only one of the two methods
that it is possible to determine the epileptogenic zone by determining the MEG model zone having the highest centrality value hub within the intercritical network by studying networks using graph theory
Detailed Description:
None
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?:
None
Secondary IDs
| Secondary ID | Type | Domain | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-A02452-53 | OTHER | ANSM | None |