Your activity: 193 p.v.
your limit has been reached. plz Donate us to allow your ip full access, Email: sshnevis@outlook.com

Neuroimaging in the evaluation of seizures and epilepsy

Neuroimaging in the evaluation of seizures and epilepsy
Authors:
Hiba Arif Haider, MD
Katie Bullinger, MD, PhD
Section Editors:
Steven C Schachter, MD
Glenn A Tung, MD, FACR
Deputy Editor:
John F Dashe, MD, PhD
Literature review current through: Dec 2022. | This topic last updated: Sep 02, 2022.

INTRODUCTION — The term "epileptic seizure" refers to a transient occurrence of signs and/or symptoms due to abnormally excessive neuronal activity of the cerebral cortex. Epilepsy is a condition characterized by recurrent, unprovoked seizures. The diagnosis of epilepsy is often not straightforward, and misdiagnosis is relatively common [1]. A detailed and reliable account of the event by an eyewitness is crucial to the diagnostic evaluation, but may not be available [2].

The purpose of the diagnostic evaluation in a patient with seizures is to provide evidence that helps confirm or refute the diagnosis of epilepsy and to identify the cause of epilepsy and/or to classify the epileptic syndrome. Neuroimaging also has a critical role in the evaluation of patients with refractory epilepsy for epilepsy surgery.

This topic will discuss neuroimaging in the diagnostic evaluation of adults with possible epileptic seizures. Other aspects of diagnostic testing for seizures and epilepsy are discussed separately. (See "Evaluation and management of the first seizure in adults" and "Seizures and epilepsy in children: Clinical and laboratory diagnosis" and "Electroencephalography (EEG) in the diagnosis of seizures and epilepsy" and "Video and ambulatory EEG monitoring in the diagnosis of seizures and epilepsy".)

COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY — Computed tomography (CT) is commonly ordered in patients presenting with new-onset seizure to an emergency department. It is generally available quickly in that setting and is used to exclude acute neurologic problems that require urgent intervention [3]. CT is able to identify hemorrhages, gross structural malformations, large tumors, and calcified lesions. Skull-based CT may be helpful in identifying bone deficits through which temporal encephaloceles protrude. CT angiography may be useful in characterizing vascular malformations such as arteriovenous malformations or arteriovenous fistulas. (See "Evaluation and management of the first seizure in adults".)

However, in most nonemergency situations, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is more sensitive than CT and is the neuroimaging study of choice.

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING — Most patients suspected of having had an epileptic seizure should have a neuroimaging study. The purpose is to identify a structural etiology for epilepsy. The mainstay of elective neuroimaging is MRI, which has not only higher sensitivity than CT for most epileptogenic lesions but also better spatial resolution and soft-tissue contrast [4-6]. In addition, it allows imaging in multiple planes as well as functional cerebral assessment through different techniques.

Exceptions to the need for neuroimaging include children with simple febrile seizures and children whose clinical history and electroencephalography (EEG) are consistent with benign partial epilepsy of childhood or idiopathic generalized epilepsy. (See "Clinical features and evaluation of febrile seizures" and "Benign (self-limited) focal epilepsies of childhood" and "Epilepsy syndromes in children".)

Specific pathologies — Structural causes of epilepsy that can be identified by MRI include [7,8]:

Mesial temporal sclerosis (hippocampal sclerosis) (image 1 and image 2)

Malformations of cortical development (eg, cortical dysplasia) (table 1 and image 3 and image 4)

Brain tumors

Vascular malformations (image 5)

Cerebral infarction, cerebral hemorrhage

Traumatic brain injury

Infections, including encephalitis, cerebral abscess, granulomas, and cysts (neurocysticercosis)

Temporal encephaloceles

Mesial temporal sclerosis, also known as hippocampal sclerosis, is the most commonly diagnosed focal structural abnormality in patients with epilepsy. While most cases present in childhood, it is not uncommon for this disorder to first appear in young adults.

Primary imaging signs of mesial temporal lobe sclerosis (image 1 and image 2) include:

Reduced size

T2- and FLAIR-hyperintense signal

Abnormal morphology (eg, loss of stratum lacunosum and moleculare)

Secondary signs include ipsilateral:

Atrophy of the fornix, mammillary body, or both

Enlargement of the temporal horn, choroidal fissure, or both

Reduced volume of white matter in the parahippocampal gyrus

Global reduction of temporal lobe white matter volume

Surgery or laser interstitial thermal treatment is often curative in patients who do not become seizure free on medication. (See "Focal epilepsy: Causes and clinical features", section on 'Hippocampal sclerosis' and "Surgical treatment of epilepsy in adults".)

Malformations of cortical development (eg, focal cortical dysplasia) (table 1) are the second most common structural etiology for epilepsy [9,10]. When a patient with focal-onset epilepsy is found to have a normal MRI, an undetected focal cortical dysplasias is typically considered to be the most likely underlying lesion.

With increasing use of higher-field MRI (ie, 3-Tesla and 7-Tesla), focal cortical dysplasia is being identified in a greater number of epilepsy patients. MRI is more sensitive for identifying focal cortical dysplasias with more severe pathologic grade than for milder lesions, and these are more amenable to surgical cure [11,12]. Subtle findings such as blurring of the grey-white junction or FLAIR-hyperintensity in subcortical white matter may be missed on initial interpretation of the MRI and identified when the study is re-reviewed (image 3) [10]. These lesions are congenital, and related epilepsy usually presents in childhood. However, it is not rare for epilepsy to first develop in young adults.

Low-grade glial or glioneuronal neoplasm is a cause of seizure in children and young adults (image 6). In older patients, cortical scarring (eg, encephalomalacia) after trauma or ischemic stroke, or higher-grade neoplasm may be a cause of seizure. (See "Seizures and epilepsy in older adults: Etiology, clinical presentation, and diagnosis".)

Certain infections, especially neurocysticercosis caused by Taenia solium, are common etiologies of epilepsy in endemic populations. When neurocysticercosis is suspected, MRI with contrast is useful for identifying cysts and evaluating disease activity (image 7). However, CT may add to the diagnostic evaluation, as CT is more sensitive than MRI for detecting small areas of calcification. (See "Cysticercosis: Clinical manifestations and diagnosis" and "Cysticercosis: Epidemiology, transmission, and prevention".)

Sensitivity — Most individuals with new-onset epilepsy will not have a structural lesion on MRI; in one case series, the yield was 14 percent [7]. Among reported studies, a wide range (1 to 57 percent) of neuroimaging studies in patients with epilepsy are abnormal [4,13-16]. These differences reflect the technology used (eg, CT versus MRI, and low- or high-field MRI), the patient population studied, and the prevalence of certain epileptogenic lesions (eg, neurocysticercosis). As an example, emergency department-based studies include a larger number with acute symptomatic seizures that are more likely to have corresponding CT or MRI abnormalities [13]. Also, older patient populations are more likely to have structural brain lesions identified on MRI as a cause for epilepsy than are populations of primarily younger adults.

While brain MRI is routinely used in the clinical evaluation of epilepsy, there remains a substantial gap between the sensitivity and specificity of MRI in different care settings [10,17]. In one study, 123 patients referred for epilepsy surgery evaluation had had a "standard" MRI at an outside center (not attached to an epilepsy center) [17]. The original MRI interpretation was compared with a reinterpretation of the original MRI and with the results of a repeat MRI performed using a dedicated epilepsy protocol (see 'Epilepsy protocol for MRI' below). The sensitivity of MRI for focal lesions for each of these was 39, 50, and 91 percent, respectively. This was a selected population with refractory epilepsy that excluded patients with acute focal brain conditions, including cerebral abscess and rapidly expanding brain tumors. In most cases, the missed diagnosis was hippocampal sclerosis.

Epilepsy protocol for MRI — In 15 to 30 percent of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy, the brain MRI is negative; that is, no structural lesion can be identified [18-20]. To optimize the yield, MRI should be performed using an epilepsy protocol [6,21,22]. While epilepsy protocols vary depending on the institution and available technology, most recommendations agree that an epilepsy protocol for MRI should ideally include:

Standard T1-weighted images.

Three-dimensional (3D) volumetric T1-weighted images (1 mm isotropic voxels) with high definition of the gray-white junction (eg, magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition gradient echo [MPRAGE] and 3D fast spoiled gradient recalled echo acquisition at steady state [3D fast spoiled GRASS or 3D-SPGR]) for evaluation of brain anatomy, detection of malformations of cortical development, and application of postprocessing techniques such as 3D reconstructions and volumetric analyses.

Axial and coronal T2-weighted (T2/short tau inversion recovery [STIR]) imaging for assessment of hippocampal architecture, basal temporal encephaloceles, and cystic tissue components of other lesions.

Axial and coronal fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequences for assessing signal abnormalities and detection of hippocampal sclerosis, focal cortical dysplasia, tumors, inflammation, and scars.

Axial T2 gradient echo or susceptibility-weighted sequences for identification of vascular and calcified lesions such as cavernomas and arteriovenous malformations, small hemosiderin deposits, and prior traumatic brain injury.

A widely accepted imaging protocol for epilepsy-specific imaging based on the above sequences was shown to identify 99.4 percent of 2740 epileptogenic lesions, providing a reasonable balance between diagnostic accuracy and clinical feasibility [23].

Imaging sequences should consist of contiguous, thin (<1.5 mm) slices that cover the entire brain. All the above sequences should be obtained in two orthogonal planes, with coronal images obtained obliquely and oriented perpendicular to the hippocampus in such a way that allows direct comparison between the left and right hemispheres. The oblique coronal orientation minimizes partial volume effects that otherwise commonly obscure hippocampal sclerosis and small lesions in the temporal lobe. The use of gadolinium-based contrast is not required for initial diagnostic MRI studies, but can be used to better characterize pathologies seen on noncontrast study or to improve sensitivity in initially negative studies [21,24].

MRI evidence of hippocampal atrophy is a strong predictor of excellent postoperative seizure control after anterior temporal lobectomy or laser interstitial thermal treatment [25]. For cases of hippocampal sclerosis where qualitative radiologic findings are not seen, however, quantitative volumetric hippocampal analysis may help to bridge the gap between sensitivity and specificity. Volumetry correlates well with histopathologically confirmed hippocampal cell loss [26]. Thus, reduced volume by quantitative analysis is an established surrogate marker for the presence and severity of hippocampal atrophy [27]. However, hippocampal volumetry has been difficult to incorporate in clinical practice because of the time demands and the technical skills required. Instead, automated software for generic quantitative morphometrics has substituted time-consuming manual techniques. Studies have shown that these automated techniques can detect hippocampal asymmetry and lateralize hippocampal atrophy accurately [28].

Advanced MRI techniques — Sensitivity also appears to be improved by more advanced MRI technologies. In particular, higher magnetic field strength (eg, 3-Tesla and 7-Tesla) and use of multichannel phased-array surface coils allow for a higher signal-to-noise ratio, improved image uniformity, and better spatial resolution [29]. One early study found that the use of phased-array surface coil MRI performed at 3-Tesla detected focal lesions in 65 percent of patients with a previously negative MRI [30]. Findings included cortical dysplasia, benign tumors, and hippocampal sclerosis. In one-third of patients with a previous abnormal MRI, the 3-Tesla MRI study further characterized lesional pathology and anatomic extent. Other reports also confirm the superiority of higher field-strength imaging study [31,32].

Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) [33-35], magnetization transfer imaging [36], voxel-based analysis [37], and T2 mapping [38,39] are other technologies that show promise in the improved detection of both hippocampal sclerosis and malformations of cortical development. DTI provides information regarding the direction of the diffusion of water in each voxel, which can be used to estimate the orientation of white-matter tracts. This information can be used to trace major myelinated tracts (tractography) as part of a surgical evaluation; for example, it can be used for visualization of the optic radiation and for predicting visual field deficits after surgery [40,41]. (See "Surgical treatment of epilepsy in adults".)

Susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) is a three-dimensional MRI sequence with improved spatial resolution and enhanced magnetic susceptibility for compounds that distort the local magnetic field, such as blood products (ie, hemosiderin), deoxyhemoglobin in venous blood, iron content (ie, ferritin), and calcium content. SWI is more sensitive in detecting cavernous malformations compared with both T2-weighted FSE and T2*-weighted gradient-echo sequences [42]. This technique also appears to be helpful in identifying epileptogenic, postinfectious, and calcified lesions (eg, cryptococcus, tuberculosis, cysticercosis) [43].

High-resolution MRI is required for the diagnosis of many malformations of cortical development. On a standard MRI, findings suggestive of dysplasia include cortical thickening, blurring of the gray-white margin, increased signal on FLAIR, and subtle tapering bands of gray matter extending from the cortex toward the ventricles (image 3) [44]. Subtle lesions can be missed, and false-positive MRI readings can result from overinterpretation of normal variations in cortical thickness [24]. Though not yet widely in clinical use, 7-Tesla has even greater ability than 3-Tesla MRI to detect structural lesions using gradient echo and FLAIR images, and is especially promising for the detection of focal cortical dysplasias missed on conventional MRI [45-47].

Specificity of MRI findings for epilepsy — Not all MRI abnormalities are associated with epileptic seizures. Punctate foci of T2-hyperintense signal in the white matter, many cystic lesions (arachnoid cysts, choroidal fissure cysts), lacunar strokes, ventricular asymmetry, diffuse atrophy, and isolated venous anomalies (eg, developmental venous anomalies that are not associated with cavernous malformation) are not known to be epileptogenic, and should be considered incidental to a seizure diagnosis [24].

When a potentially epileptogenic structural abnormality is seen on brain MRI, it suggests an anatomic substrate for epilepsy, and provides support for a diagnosis of epilepsy. However, such findings should not be interpreted in isolation and must be correlated with the patient's seizure semiology and EEG findings. Several observations suggest that such findings might be incidental in a small proportion of patients.

In patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy, MRI abnormalities have been reported in up to 24 percent [48,49]. While most of these findings were not epileptogenic (eg, arachnoid cyst, diffuse cortical atrophy, etc), potentially epileptogenic lesions were seen in 3 to 4 percent. Similarly, one series reported abnormal MRI findings in 15 percent of 71 children with clinical and EEG features of benign childhood epilepsy with central midtemporal spikes [50]. Less than half of these findings were potentially epileptogenic. The benign course of these children's epilepsy syndromes suggests that these findings were truly incidental.

In patients with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures, an abnormal brain MRI is reported in 10 to 38 percent [51-55]. Again, some, but not all of these abnormalities were epileptogenic, such as post-traumatic gliosis and hippocampal sclerosis [54].

In a study comparing brain MRIs in 51 healthy controls and 99 patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), increased signal was noted in one or both hippocampi in 29 percent of controls (compared with 47.5 percent of patients) [56]. Hippocampal atrophy was a more specific finding, noted in only one control subject versus 19 percent of patients; no control had both atrophy and increased signal in the same hippocampus. (See "Focal epilepsy: Causes and clinical features", section on 'Hippocampal sclerosis'.)

In normal, healthy adult volunteers, intracranial abnormalities were observed in 4.2 percent in one study of 1000 individuals [57]. Pathologies included those that were potentially epileptogenic (eg, tumors, remote trauma), as well as those that were not (arachnoid cyst, empty sella, lacunar infarction). This study may have underestimated the prevalence of relevant abnormalities, especially mesial temporal sclerosis, since they were not performed with a dedicated epilepsy protocol.

Amygdala enlargement (AE) (image 8) is increasingly being reported on MRI in patients with TLE, with higher incidences reported in nonlesional TLE (12 to 63 percent) than in TLE with mesial temporal sclerosis (14 percent) [58-63]. This has led to the suggestion that it represents a distinct TLE subtype [64]. However, AE is observed at high rates in the amygdala contralateral to seizure onset [58], and epileptogenic activity appears to arise from the hippocampus, not the enlarged amygdala, at least in some cases [65]. Small sample sizes and variable methods for defining AE make it difficult to evaluate whether AE is specific to TLE [66]. Histopathologically, AE may be characterized by clustering hypertrophic neurons and vacuolation with slight gliosis or even no gliosis [65].

Temporal encephaloceles are parenchymal protrusions through a bony defect in the middle cranial fossa (image 9) [67-69]. They are a relatively rare cause of medically refractory epilepsy. Detection of encephaloceles is facilitated by thin-slice 3D MRI sequences and skull base CT. As with other lesions, a causal relationship between temporal encephaloceles and the epilepsy syndrome is not always clear, and the surgical approach to symptomatic lesions varies. (See "Surgical treatment of epilepsy in adults", section on 'Temporal encephaloceles'.)

Another potential source of diagnostic confusion is that some patients may have acute MRI changes that are attributed to the effect of seizures rather than their cause. These are more common after prolonged seizures (eg, status epilepticus) or clusters of seizures, and are characterized by focal cortical swelling, increased T2-FLAIR signal intensity, restricted diffusion, and focal parenchymal and/or leptomeningeal contrast enhancement that resolve on subsequent imaging studies. These are discussed separately. (See "Magnetic resonance imaging changes related to acute seizure activity".)

FUNCTIONAL MRI — Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) can detect focal changes in blood flow and oxygenation levels that occur when an area of the brain is activated. A change in the level of neuronal activity is accompanied by a change in the ratio of concentration of oxy- to deoxyhemoglobin in the blood measured on MRI as the blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) effect. fMRI can be used to noninvasively map eloquent cortex serving motor, sensory, and language functions (image 10), and is most commonly used as part of surgical planning to predict and limit postoperative neurologic deficits, particularly language function, though it may also be able to help predict memory outcomes [70-78].

A 2017 guideline and meta-analysis from the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) assessed the value of fMRI for patients with epilepsy in determining lateralization and predicting postsurgical language and memory outcomes [79]. The authors concluded that language lateralization based on fMRI was concordant with the Wada test in mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (concordance rate 87 percent) and in extratemporal lobe epilepsy (concordance rate 81 percent), but those data were insufficient for temporal tumors or lateral temporal cases. The guideline concluded that fMRI is possibly effective in predicting postsurgical language deficits in patients undergoing temporal lobectomy.

fMRI may eventually replace the more invasive carotid amobarbital (Wada) test, particularly for language lateralization [80,81]. Early work suggests that fMRI also may be able to visualize the functional anatomy of memory tasks and may eventually assist decision-making and planning of epilepsy surgery [74,82-89]. In a later study, lateralization of memory using a picture recognition paradigm predicted postoperative verbal and visual memory outcome independent of the type of lesion, the side of the epileptic focus, or the type of preoperative memory profile [90]. (See "Surgical treatment of epilepsy in adults".)

Interpretation of fMRI requires caution; it is an indirect measure of brain function. Discrepancies with the Wada test have been described [91-94]. Its sensitivity and specificity are imperfect (84 and 88 percent compared with the Wada test, in one meta-analysis), particularly in extratemporal epilepsy, and analyses have not been standardized [95]. Also, some patients cannot complete fMRI or have inconclusive fMRI results and still require preoperative Wada testing [94]. There are good data on its ability to lateralize language but not localize it adequately for surgical planning [96]. Thus, correct and clinically useful interpretation of fMRI for presurgical evaluation strongly depends on the expertise of the individual investigator and center.

Simultaneous recording of EEG and fMRI can visualize the BOLD response during interictal or ictal epileptic activity. This emerging technique capitalizing on the spatial resolution of fMRI and the temporal resolution of EEG could assist in identifying targets for surgical treatment [97-106]. However, the utility of fMRI for this purpose is not yet established.

PET — 18-F fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) demonstrates the topographic distribution of glucose uptake in the brain and provides a picture of cerebral metabolism (image 11). FDG-PET is obtained during interictal period since cerebral uptake occurs 30 to 40 minutes after injection and thus, unless a seizure is long-lasting, an area of uptake may not be detected during the ictus. The goal of interictal FDG-PET is to identify focal areas of decreased metabolism (ie, relative hypometabolism) that are presumed to reflect focal functional disturbances of cerebral activity associated with epileptogenic tissue, otherwise known as the functional deficit zone. FDG-PET is generally performed as part of a presurgical evaluation.

In mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE), FDG-PET shows a widespread ipsilateral hypometabolism involving the mesial temporal structures, temporal pole, and lateral temporal cortex and often involving extratemporal areas including the insula, the frontal lobe, perisylvian regions, and the thalamus [107]. Given that the region of FDG-PET hypometabolism can extend beyond the epileptogenic lesion, FDG-PET should not be used to define margins for epilepsy surgery [108]. Furthermore, hypometabolism in the extratemporal regions and/or contralateral hemisphere in patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy is associated with a poorer response to epilepsy surgery [109].

Sensitivity for detecting relative temporal lobe hypometabolism with FDG-PET in MTLE ranges between 80 and 90 percent [110-117]. Visual assessment is less accurate than voxel-based morphometry, normalized to reference templates of healthy controls [118,119]. Much of the variability in sensitivity reflects the heterogeneity of the epilepsy more than it does the differences in quality or specifications of the PET camera [120]. Some reports suggest that the sensitivity of PET is increased when seizures are more frequent or when performed soon after a seizure has occurred [121].

Only a few patients in the above series included patients with MTLE without hippocampal sclerosis on MRI. However, these and other series have shown that FDG-PET can be helpful in lateralizing the epileptogenic temporal lobe in "MRI-negative" cases, with a yield that ranges from 45 to almost 90 percent [111-115,122-125].

Hypometabolic patterns on FDG-PET are predictive for surgical outcome in patients with MTLE [109,126]. Specifically, Engel class IA postsurgical outcome (ie, completely seizure-free after surgery) is associated with a focal anteromesial temporal hypometabolism, whereas suboptimal nonclass IA outcomes correlate with extratemporal metabolic changes [109].

There is less information available regarding the usefulness of FDG-PET in extratemporal epilepsy, but it appears somewhat less sensitive in these cases [13,110,112,127-130]. An exception may be patients with cortical dysplasia, in whom the reported sensitivity of PET varies between 60 and 92 percent [131]. Another limitation of PET is that the area of hypometabolism typically extends beyond the epileptogenic zone, making it less useful for precise neuroanatomic localization [107,110,129,132]. Similarly, coregistration of FDG-PET and MRI shows potential for improved sensitivity and specificity compared with either technology alone [133-135]. This is particularly useful in MRI-negative extratemporal lobe epilepsy (ETLE) for detecting focal cortical dysplasias and thus significantly improving the diagnosis and surgical outcome of these patients [134].

The use of other tracers (eg, [11C]flumazenil, 18fluoroethyl-l-tyrosine, alpha methyl tryptophan, and serotonin agonists) remains largely experimental but holds promise for improving the sensitivity and specificity of PET for presurgical localization [112,117,121,129,136-144].

SPECT — Neuronal activity is strongly correlated with regional cerebral blood flow (CBF) neurovascular coupling. As such, an assessment of regional CBF during a seizure (ictus) may enable localization of the seizure focus. In single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), regional CBF can be imaged using perfusion radiotracers 99mTc-hexamethylpropyleneamine-oxime (HMPAO) or 99mTc-ethyl cysteinate dimer (ECD). Rapid initial uptake of these radiotracers in brain peaks within the first minutes of injection. SPECT obtained after 30 to 90 minutes for HMPAO and 30 to 60 minutes for ECD (range 10 minutes to six hours) provides a snapshot of CBF at the time of tracer administration.

Optimal evaluation of the epileptogenic focus with SPECT requires acquisition of two scans, one during the seizure (ictal) and one at baseline (interictal). The ictal scan requires the patient to be admitted to the hospital and monitored electrographically and clinically for seizure activity [145]. For ictal SPECT, the radiotracer should ideally be administered within 20 seconds of electrographic seizure onset; injection after 45 seconds is more likely to be falsely or non-localizing [121,146,147]. Increased regional CBF during the ictal phase (image 12) is followed by decreased CBF; the entire cerebral lobe and contralateral hemisphere may exhibit reduced perfusion after the seizure [148,149]. The sensitivity of SPECT is improved by comparison of ictal and interictal SPECT studies with quantitative subtraction techniques or by statistical comparison with a control database (statistical parametric mapping) [132,150,151]. Coregistration with MRI, a technique known as subtraction ictal SPECT scan coregistered with MRI (SISCOM), improves localization and can help predict surgical success [150,152-156].

SPECT can be useful in the identification of a possible epileptic focus, particularly when MRI is unremarkable, that can be further tested with intracranial EEG studies [157,158]. In some cases, re-evaluation of MRI prompted by abnormal SPECT has revealed a subtle structural lesion [159]. Ictal SPECT studies have a high yield in the evaluation of temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) that exceeds 90 percent, but the sensitivity for extratemporal seizure foci is lower [110,116,160-162]. In one study of 53 patients with secondary generalized seizures, ictal SPECT identified an unambiguous seizure focus in only 50 percent; however, when a single unambiguous region of cerebral blood flow increase was seen, this was the correct localization in 80 percent [158].

However, SPECT studies have certain limitations in their utility to localize the seizure focus. Injection timing is critical; the tracer takes 30 seconds to reach the brain and the switch from ictal hyperperfusion to post-ictal hypoperfusion can take place in less than one or two minutes [121,132,163]. Propagation of seizure activity from the original focus of seizure onset to other brain regions can be even quicker [164]. As a result, areas of ictal hyperperfusion on SPECT may represent a false localization demonstrating areas of seizure propagation rather than seizure onset [158,160]. This may make SPECT localization a less reliable predictor of surgical outcome compared with other imaging studies, at least in some case series [121,122]. One study suggested that an injection time of less than 20 seconds after seizure onset is an important predictor of accurate localization; technically, this can be difficult to execute [165].

MEG AND MSI — Magnetoencephalography (MEG) is the recording of magnetic fields generated by intraneuronal electrical currents. Magnetic source imaging (MSI) is the coregistration of MEG source localization with anatomic imaging, MRI in most cases [166].

MEG is similar to EEG. However, while the electrical currents that are measured with EEG are attenuated in strength and spatially blurred by tissues between the brain and the scalp surface, the magnetic fields assessed by MEG are not significantly affected by intervening tissue layers [167]. As a result, MEG may allow for more clinically reliable localization of brain activity [168].

MEG and EEG can be viewed as complementary studies [169]. MEG is maximally sensitive to dipoles situated tangentially to the surface, whereas EEG is maximally sensitive to radial dipoles [170]. Single spikes with small amplitudes (eg, from mesial temporal sources) can be averaged to increase their signal-to-noise ratio. Averaged MEG spikes can thus be helpful in detecting discharges that are hidden in the background noise in simultaneous EEG recordings (waveform 1 and image 13). This phenomenon is reciprocal: in some cases, EEG spikes are more apparent than on MEG [169]. Some studies suggest that MEG has specific advantages for spike detection in extratemporal epilepsies, particularly those that lie superficially on the brain's surface [171-173].

MEG/MSI have been approved for presurgical localization of epilepsy and may be particularly useful for localization of spike sources in the following patients [132,172,174]:

Those with no lesion visible on MRI [172,175-180].

Those with cystic lesions (post-traumatic encephalomalacia with prior surgical resection) to determine the relationship between the epileptogenic focus and the lesion; MEG/MSI also appears to be useful in identifying the extent of the epileptogenic lesion in patients with focal cortical dysplasia, cavernous angiomas, and tumors [181-185].

Those with MRI lesions of undetermined significance, including those with dual pathology or multifocal pathology such as tuberous sclerosis and others [186-188].

Those who have had previous unsuccessful epilepsy surgery [181,189,190].

A large study in 455 epilepsy patients demonstrated an average sensitivity for MEG of 70 percent for specific epileptic activity [191]. Among patients who underwent surgical therapy, MSI provided a localization in 89 percent, supplying additional information in 35 percent and information that was crucial to medical decision-making in 10 percent. Similar sensitivity has been reported in other studies [171,176,192-194].

MEG is also approved for the localization of neuronal function (similar to evoked potentials and functional MRI [fMRI]) for language, sensorimotor, or visual cortex, and has been used to localize other cortical functions as well. MEG language mapping has been shown to agree with results of the Wada test in 75 to 95 percent of patients [169,170,195-197].

ESI — Electrical source imaging (ESI) is a model-based imaging technique that integrates spatial and temporal components of EEG to identify the generators of abnormal electrical activity associated with seizures [198].

In electrical source localization, by reconstructing the electric potentials recorded with scalp EEG, the location of the underlying currents can be estimated and merged with structural images of individual patients. It is typically based on the analysis of interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs) but can also be calculated from ictal EEG discharges [199,200].

ESI enhances noninvasive localization accuracy of the epileptogenic zone [198]. High density-based ESI using a high number (128 to 256) of recording EEG electrodes has further improved localization accuracy. In one study, the diagnostic performance of ESI compared favorably with that of MRI and PET [201]. Importantly, concordance of the ESI result and the epileptogenic lesion delineated by MRI was associated with a probability of being seizure free (positive predictive value) of 92 percent.

INFORMATION FOR PATIENTS — UpToDate offers two types of patient education materials, "The Basics" and "Beyond the Basics." The Basics patient education pieces are written in plain language, at the 5th to 6th grade reading level, and they answer the four or five key questions a patient might have about a given condition. These articles are best for patients who want a general overview and who prefer short, easy-to-read materials. Beyond the Basics patient education pieces are longer, more sophisticated, and more detailed. These articles are written at the 10th to 12th grade reading level and are best for patients who want in-depth information and are comfortable with some medical jargon.

Here are the patient education articles that are relevant to this topic. We encourage you to print or e-mail these topics to your patients. (You can also locate patient education articles on a variety of subjects by searching on "patient info" and the keyword(s) of interest.)

Basics topics (see "Patient education: Epilepsy in adults (The Basics)" and "Patient education: Epilepsy in children (The Basics)")

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS — Neuroimaging is central to the evaluation of patients with epilepsy, especially in the identification of structural brain lesions that can serve as epileptogenic foci, and that might be surgically resectable if the patient becomes refractory to medical treatment.

Because of its relative insensitivity compared with MRI, CT has a limited role in the evaluation of patients with seizures. It is usually restricted to the emergency department setting in the evaluation of acute symptomatic seizures. (See 'Computed tomography' above.)

Virtually all patients with new-onset epilepsy should have an MRI study to identify a potential structural cause of epilepsy including hippocampal sclerosis, brain tumor, dysplasia, vascular malformation, temporal encephaloceles, and others. (See 'Specific pathologies' above.)

While less than half of patients with epilepsy will have a cause identified on MRI, the sensitivity can be substantially improved by utilizing an epilepsy protocol. (See 'Sensitivity' above.)

Not all MRI findings are relevant; isolated findings of diffuse atrophy, punctate foci of T2 signal abnormalities in the white matter, and other nonspecific findings are not known to be epileptogenic. MRI findings should be correlated with the patient's seizure semiology and EEG findings; some potentially epileptogenic lesions may be incidental. (See 'Specificity of MRI findings for epilepsy' above.)

Other neuroimaging modalities, such as positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and magnetic source imaging (MSI) are primarily used in the presurgical evaluation of patients with medically refractory epilepsy. These are employed to better define the area of functional defect and epileptogenicity, to identify MRI-occult lesions, to identify the more active lesion in patients with dual or multiple pathologies, and to map neurologic functions as part of surgical planning. (See 'PET' above and 'SPECT' above and 'MEG and MSI' above.)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT — The editorial staff at UpToDate acknowledges Lawrence J Hirsch, MD, who contributed to an earlier version of this topic review.

  1. Scheepers B, Clough P, Pickles C. The misdiagnosis of epilepsy: findings of a population study. Seizure 1998; 7:403.
  2. van Donselaar CA, Stroink H, Arts WF, Dutch Study Group of Epilepsy in Childhood. How confident are we of the diagnosis of epilepsy? Epilepsia 2006; 47 Suppl 1:9.
  3. Tranvinh E, Lanzman B, Provenzale J, Wintermark M. Imaging Evaluation of the Adult Presenting With New-Onset Seizure. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2019; 212:15.
  4. Krumholz A, Wiebe S, Gronseth G, et al. Practice Parameter: evaluating an apparent unprovoked first seizure in adults (an evidence-based review): report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Epilepsy Society. Neurology 2007; 69:1996.
  5. Lee YJ. Advanced neuroimaging techniques for evaluating pediatric epilepsy. Clin Exp Pediatr 2020; 63:88.
  6. Bernasconi A, Cendes F, Theodore WH, et al. Recommendations for the use of structural magnetic resonance imaging in the care of patients with epilepsy: A consensus report from the International League Against Epilepsy Neuroimaging Task Force. Epilepsia 2019; 60:1054.
  7. King MA, Newton MR, Jackson GD, et al. Epileptology of the first-seizure presentation: a clinical, electroencephalographic, and magnetic resonance imaging study of 300 consecutive patients. Lancet 1998; 352:1007.
  8. Maehara T. Neuroimaging of epilepsy. Neuropathology 2007; 27:585.
  9. Sisodiya SM. Malformations of cortical development: burdens and insights from important causes of human epilepsy. Lancet Neurol 2004; 3:29.
  10. Oster JM, Igbokwe E, Cosgrove GR, Cole AJ. Identifying subtle cortical gyral abnormalities as a predictor of focal cortical dysplasia and a cure for epilepsy. Arch Neurol 2012; 69:257.
  11. Kim YH, Kang HC, Kim DS, et al. Neuroimaging in identifying focal cortical dysplasia and prognostic factors in pediatric and adolescent epilepsy surgery. Epilepsia 2011; 52:722.
  12. Blümcke I, Thom M, Aronica E, et al. The clinicopathologic spectrum of focal cortical dysplasias: a consensus classification proposed by an ad hoc Task Force of the ILAE Diagnostic Methods Commission. Epilepsia 2011; 52:158.
  13. Bernal B, Altman NR. Evidence-based medicine: neuroimaging of seizures. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2003; 13:211.
  14. Adams SM, Knowles PD. Evaluation of a first seizure. Am Fam Physician 2007; 75:1342.
  15. Pohlmann-Eden B, Newton M. First seizure: EEG and neuroimaging following an epileptic seizure. Epilepsia 2008; 49 Suppl 1:19.
  16. Woermann FG, Vollmar C. Clinical MRI in children and adults with focal epilepsy: a critical review. Epilepsy Behav 2009; 15:40.
  17. Von Oertzen J, Urbach H, Jungbluth S, et al. Standard magnetic resonance imaging is inadequate for patients with refractory focal epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2002; 73:643.
  18. Duncan JS, Winston GP, Koepp MJ, Ourselin S. Brain imaging in the assessment for epilepsy surgery. Lancet Neurol 2016; 15:420.
  19. Duncan JS. Imaging in the surgical treatment of epilepsy. Nat Rev Neurol 2010; 6:537.
  20. Bien CG, Szinay M, Wagner J, et al. Characteristics and surgical outcomes of patients with refractory magnetic resonance imaging-negative epilepsies. Arch Neurol 2009; 66:1491.
  21. Recommendations for neuroimaging of patients with epilepsy. Commission on Neuroimaging of the International League Against Epilepsy. Epilepsia 1997; 38:1255.
  22. Gaillard WD, Chiron C, Cross JH, et al. Guidelines for imaging infants and children with recent-onset epilepsy. Epilepsia 2009; 50:2147.
  23. Wellmer J, Quesada CM, Rothe L, et al. Proposal for a magnetic resonance imaging protocol for the detection of epileptogenic lesions at early outpatient stages. Epilepsia 2013; 54:1977.
  24. Vattipally VR, Bronen RA. MR imaging of epilepsy: strategies for successful interpretation. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2004; 14:349.
  25. Kuzniecky R, Burgard S, Faught E, et al. Predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging in temporal lobe epilepsy surgery. Arch Neurol 1993; 50:65.
  26. Hammers A, Heckemann R, Koepp MJ, et al. Automatic detection and quantification of hippocampal atrophy on MRI in temporal lobe epilepsy: a proof-of-principle study. Neuroimage 2007; 36:38.
  27. Spencer SS, McCarthy G, Spencer DD. Diagnosis of medial temporal lobe seizure onset: relative specificity and sensitivity of quantitative MRI. Neurology 1993; 43:2117.
  28. Farid N, Girard HM, Kemmotsu N, et al. Temporal lobe epilepsy: quantitative MR volumetry in detection of hippocampal atrophy. Radiology 2012; 264:542.
  29. Friedman E. Epilepsy imaging in adults: getting it right. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 203:1093.
  30. Knake S, Triantafyllou C, Wald LL, et al. 3T phased array MRI improves the presurgical evaluation in focal epilepsies: a prospective study. Neurology 2005; 65:1026.
  31. Phal PM, Usmanov A, Nesbit GM, et al. Qualitative comparison of 3-T and 1.5-T MRI in the evaluation of epilepsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 191:890.
  32. Hashiguchi K, Morioka T, Murakami N, et al. Utility of 3-T FLAIR and 3D short tau inversion recovery MR imaging in the preoperative diagnosis of hippocampal sclerosis: direct comparison with 1.5-T FLAIR MR imaging. Epilepsia 2010; 51:1820.
  33. Rugg-Gunn FJ, Eriksson SH, Symms MR, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging of cryptogenic and acquired partial epilepsies. Brain 2001; 124:627.
  34. Duning T, Kellinghaus C, Mohammadi S, et al. Individual white matter fractional anisotropy analysis on patients with MRI negative partial epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2010; 81:136.
  35. Wilke C, van Drongelen W, Kohrman M, He B. Neocortical seizure foci localization by means of a directed transfer function method. Epilepsia 2010; 51:564.
  36. Rugg-Gunn FJ, Eriksson SH, Boulby PA, et al. Magnetization transfer imaging in focal epilepsy. Neurology 2003; 60:1638.
  37. Colliot O, Bernasconi N, Khalili N, et al. Individual voxel-based analysis of gray matter in focal cortical dysplasia. Neuroimage 2006; 29:162.
  38. Rugg-Gunn FJ, Boulby PA, Symms MR, et al. Whole-brain T2 mapping demonstrates occult abnormalities in focal epilepsy. Neurology 2005; 64:318.
  39. Briellmann RS, Jackson GD, Pell GS, et al. Structural abnormalities remote from the seizure focus: a study using T2 relaxometry at 3 T. Neurology 2004; 63:2303.
  40. Winston GP, Yogarajah M, Symms MR, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging tractography to visualize the relationship of the optic radiation to epileptogenic lesions prior to neurosurgery. Epilepsia 2011; 52:1430.
  41. Yogarajah M, Focke NK, Bonelli S, et al. Defining Meyer's loop-temporal lobe resections, visual field deficits and diffusion tensor tractography. Brain 2009; 132:1656.
  42. de Souza JM, Domingues RC, Cruz LC Jr, et al. Susceptibility-weighted imaging for the evaluation of patients with familial cerebral cavernous malformations: a comparison with t2-weighted fast spin-echo and gradient-echo sequences. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008; 29:154.
  43. Saini J, Kesavadas C, Thomas B, et al. Susceptibility weighted imaging in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with intractable epilepsy. Epilepsia 2009; 50:1462.
  44. Chan S, Chin SS, Nordli DR, et al. Prospective magnetic resonance imaging identification of focal cortical dysplasia, including the non-balloon cell subtype. Ann Neurol 1998; 44:749.
  45. De Ciantis A, Barba C, Tassi L, et al. 7T MRI in focal epilepsy with unrevealing conventional field strength imaging. Epilepsia 2016; 57:445.
  46. Zucca I, Milesi G, Medici V, et al. Type II focal cortical dysplasia: Ex vivo 7T magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities and histopathological comparisons. Ann Neurol 2016; 79:42.
  47. Opheim G, van der Kolk A, Markenroth Bloch K, et al. 7T Epilepsy Task Force Consensus Recommendations on the Use of 7T MRI in Clinical Practice. Neurology 2021; 96:327.
  48. Betting LE, Mory SB, Lopes-Cendes I, et al. MRI reveals structural abnormalities in patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy. Neurology 2006; 67:848.
  49. Gelisse P, Genton P, Raybaud C, et al. Structural brain lesions do not influence the prognosis of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy. Acta Neurol Scand 2000; 102:188.
  50. Gelisse P, Corda D, Raybaud C, et al. Abnormal neuroimaging in patients with benign epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes. Epilepsia 2003; 44:372.
  51. de Timary P, Fouchet P, Sylin M, et al. Non-epileptic seizures: delayed diagnosis in patients presenting with electroencephalographic (EEG) or clinical signs of epileptic seizures. Seizure 2002; 11:193.
  52. Reuber M, Pukrop R, Bauer J, et al. Outcome in psychogenic nonepileptic seizures: 1 to 10-year follow-up in 164 patients. Ann Neurol 2003; 53:305.
  53. Lancman ME, Brotherton TA, Asconapé JJ, Penry JK. Psychogenic seizures in adults: a longitudinal analysis. Seizure 1993; 2:281.
  54. Reuber M, Fernández G, Helmstaedter C, et al. Evidence of brain abnormality in patients with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. Epilepsy Behav 2002; 3:249.
  55. Ettinger AB, Jandorf L, Cabahug CJ, et al. Postictal SPECT in epileptic versus nonepileptic seizures. J Epilepsy 1998; 11:67.
  56. Labate A, Gambardella A, Aguglia U, et al. Temporal lobe abnormalities on brain MRI in healthy volunteers: a prospective case-control study. Neurology 2010; 74:553.
  57. Katzman GL, Dagher AP, Patronas NJ. Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging from 1000 asymptomatic volunteers. JAMA 1999; 282:36.
  58. Coan AC, Morita ME, Campos BM, et al. Amygdala enlargement occurs in patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy and hippocampal sclerosis with early epilepsy onset. Epilepsy Behav 2013; 29:390.
  59. Mitsueda-Ono T, Ikeda A, Inouchi M, et al. Amygdalar enlargement in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2011; 82:652.
  60. Takaya S, Ikeda A, Mitsueda-Ono T, et al. Temporal lobe epilepsy with amygdala enlargement: a morphologic and functional study. J Neuroimaging 2014; 24:54.
  61. Sone D, Ikemura M, Saito Y, et al. Marked accumulation of oligodendroglia-like cells in temporal lobe epilepsy with amygdala enlargement and hippocampal sclerosis. Neuropathology 2018; 38:154.
  62. Reyes A, Thesen T, Kuzniecky R, et al. Amygdala enlargement: Temporal lobe epilepsy subtype or nonspecific finding? Epilepsy Res 2017; 132:34.
  63. Malter MP, Widman G, Galldiks N, et al. Suspected new-onset autoimmune temporal lobe epilepsy with amygdala enlargement. Epilepsia 2016; 57:1485.
  64. Lv RJ, Sun ZR, Cui T, et al. Temporal lobe epilepsy with amygdala enlargement: a subtype of temporal lobe epilepsy. BMC Neurol 2014; 14:194.
  65. Minami N, Morino M, Uda T, et al. Surgery for amygdala enlargement with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy: pathological findings and seizure outcome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2015; 86:887.
  66. Beh SMJ, Cook MJ, D'Souza WJ. Isolated amygdala enlargement in temporal lobe epilepsy: A systematic review. Epilepsy Behav 2016; 60:33.
  67. Saavalainen T, Jutila L, Mervaala E, et al. Temporal anteroinferior encephalocele: An underrecognized etiology of temporal lobe epilepsy? Neurology 2015; 85:1467.
  68. Toledano R, Jiménez-Huete A, Campo P, et al. Small temporal pole encephalocele: A hidden cause of "normal" MRI temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 2016; 57:841.
  69. Panov F, Li Y, Chang EF, et al. Epilepsy with temporal encephalocele: Characteristics of electrocorticography and surgical outcome. Epilepsia 2016; 57:e33.
  70. Adcock JE, Wise RG, Oxbury JM, et al. Quantitative fMRI assessment of the differences in lateralization of language-related brain activation in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy. Neuroimage 2003; 18:423.
  71. Liégeois F, Connelly A, Cross JH, et al. Language reorganization in children with early-onset lesions of the left hemisphere: an fMRI study. Brain 2004; 127:1229.
  72. Noppeney U, Price CJ, Duncan JS, Koepp MJ. Reading skills after left anterior temporal lobe resection: an fMRI study. Brain 2005; 128:1377.
  73. Sabsevitz DS, Swanson SJ, Hammeke TA, et al. Use of preoperative functional neuroimaging to predict language deficits from epilepsy surgery. Neurology 2003; 60:1788.
  74. Binder JR, Sabsevitz DS, Swanson SJ, et al. Use of preoperative functional MRI to predict verbal memory decline after temporal lobe epilepsy surgery. Epilepsia 2008; 49:1377.
  75. Bonelli SB, Powell R, Yogarajah M, et al. Preoperative amygdala fMRI in temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 2009; 50:217.
  76. Arora J, Pugh K, Westerveld M, et al. Language lateralization in epilepsy patients: fMRI validated with the Wada procedure. Epilepsia 2009; 50:2225.
  77. Bonelli SB, Thompson PJ, Yogarajah M, et al. Imaging language networks before and after anterior temporal lobe resection: results of a longitudinal fMRI study. Epilepsia 2012; 53:639.
  78. Ryvlin P, Cross JH, Rheims S. Epilepsy surgery in children and adults. Lancet Neurol 2014; 13:1114.
  79. Szaflarski JP, Gloss D, Binder JR, et al. Practice guideline summary: Use of fMRI in the presurgical evaluation of patients with epilepsy: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 2017; 88:395.
  80. Benke T, Köylü B, Visani P, et al. Language lateralization in temporal lobe epilepsy: a comparison between fMRI and the Wada Test. Epilepsia 2006; 47:1308.
  81. Algahtany M, Abdrabou A, Elhaddad A, Alghamdi A. Advances in Brain Imaging Techniques for Patients With Intractable Epilepsy. Front Neurosci 2021; 15:699123.
  82. Golby AJ, Poldrack RA, Illes J, et al. Memory lateralization in medial temporal lobe epilepsy assessed by functional MRI. Epilepsia 2002; 43:855.
  83. Rabin ML, Narayan VM, Kimberg DY, et al. Functional MRI predicts post-surgical memory following temporal lobectomy. Brain 2004; 127:2286.
  84. Richardson MP, Strange BA, Thompson PJ, et al. Pre-operative verbal memory fMRI predicts post-operative memory decline after left temporal lobe resection. Brain 2004; 127:2419.
  85. Richardson MP, Strange BA, Duncan JS, Dolan RJ. Memory fMRI in left hippocampal sclerosis: optimizing the approach to predicting postsurgical memory. Neurology 2006; 66:699.
  86. Powell HW, Richardson MP, Symms MR, et al. Preoperative fMRI predicts memory decline following anterior temporal lobe resection. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2008; 79:686.
  87. Köylü B, Walser G, Ischebeck A, et al. Functional imaging of semantic memory predicts postoperative episodic memory functions in chronic temporal lobe epilepsy. Brain Res 2008; 1223:73.
  88. Cheung MC, Chan AS, Lam JM, Chan YL. Pre- and postoperative fMRI and clinical memory performance in temporal lobe epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2009; 80:1099.
  89. Bonelli SB, Powell RH, Yogarajah M, et al. Imaging memory in temporal lobe epilepsy: predicting the effects of temporal lobe resection. Brain 2010; 133:1186.
  90. Cabrera OS, Lehéricy S, Masson V, et al. Adapting a memory fMRI research protocol in clinical routine: Feasibility and results. Epilepsy Behav 2018; 81:49.
  91. Woermann FG, Jokeit H, Luerding R, et al. Language lateralization by Wada test and fMRI in 100 patients with epilepsy. Neurology 2003; 61:699.
  92. Wellmer J, Weber B, Urbach H, et al. Cerebral lesions can impair fMRI-based language lateralization. Epilepsia 2009; 50:2213.
  93. Binder JR, Swanson SJ, Sabsevitz DS, et al. A comparison of two fMRI methods for predicting verbal memory decline after left temporal lobectomy: language lateralization versus hippocampal activation asymmetry. Epilepsia 2010; 51:618.
  94. Wagner K, Hader C, Metternich B, et al. Who needs a Wada test? Present clinical indications for amobarbital procedures. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2012; 83:503.
  95. Dym RJ, Burns J, Freeman K, Lipton ML. Is functional MR imaging assessment of hemispheric language dominance as good as the Wada test?: a meta-analysis. Radiology 2011; 261:446.
  96. Benjamin CFA, Dhingra I, Li AX, et al. Presurgical language fMRI: Technical practices in epilepsy surgical planning. Hum Brain Mapp 2018; 39:4032.
  97. Federico P, Archer JS, Abbott DF, Jackson GD. Cortical/subcortical BOLD changes associated with epileptic discharges: an EEG-fMRI study at 3 T. Neurology 2005; 64:1125.
  98. Kobayashi E, Bagshaw AP, Jansen A, et al. Intrinsic epileptogenicity in polymicrogyric cortex suggested by EEG-fMRI BOLD responses. Neurology 2005; 64:1263.
  99. Liu Y, Yang T, Yang X, et al. EEG-fMRI study of the interictal epileptic activity in patients with partial epilepsy. J Neurol Sci 2008; 268:117.
  100. Moeller F, Tyvaert L, Nguyen DK, et al. EEG-fMRI: adding to standard evaluations of patients with nonlesional frontal lobe epilepsy. Neurology 2009; 73:2023.
  101. Thornton R, Laufs H, Rodionov R, et al. EEG correlated functional MRI and postoperative outcome in focal epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2010; 81:922.
  102. Archer JS, Abbott DF, Masterton RA, et al. Functional MRI interactions between dysplastic nodules and overlying cortex in periventricular nodular heterotopia. Epilepsy Behav 2010; 19:631.
  103. Gholipour T, Moeller F, Pittau F, et al. Reproducibility of interictal EEG-fMRI results in patients with epilepsy. Epilepsia 2011; 52:433.
  104. Thornton R, Vulliemoz S, Rodionov R, et al. Epileptic networks in focal cortical dysplasia revealed using electroencephalography-functional magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Neurol 2011; 70:822.
  105. Pittau F, Dubeau F, Gotman J. Contribution of EEG/fMRI to the definition of the epileptic focus. Neurology 2012; 78:1479.
  106. Goodman AM, Szaflarski JP. Recent Advances in Neuroimaging of Epilepsy. Neurotherapeutics 2021; 18:811.
  107. Wong CH, Bleasel A, Wen L, et al. The topography and significance of extratemporal hypometabolism in refractory mesial temporal lobe epilepsy examined by FDG-PET. Epilepsia 2010; 51:1365.
  108. Lapalme-Remis S, Nguyen DK. Neuroimaging of Epilepsy. Continuum (Minneap Minn) 2022; 28:306.
  109. Chassoux F, Artiges E, Semah F, et al. 18F-FDG-PET patterns of surgical success and failure in mesial temporal lobe epilepsy. Neurology 2017; 88:1045.
  110. Duncan JS. Imaging and epilepsy. Brain 1997; 120 ( Pt 2):339.
  111. Valk PE, Laxer KD, Barbaro NM, et al. High-resolution (2.6-mm) PET in partial complex epilepsy associated with mesial temporal sclerosis. Radiology 1993; 186:55.
  112. Ryvlin P, Bouvard S, Le Bars D, et al. Clinical utility of flumazenil-PET versus [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-PET and MRI in refractory partial epilepsy. A prospective study in 100 patients. Brain 1998; 121 ( Pt 11):2067.
  113. Gaillard WD, Bhatia S, Bookheimer SY, et al. FDG-PET and volumetric MRI in the evaluation of patients with partial epilepsy. Neurology 1995; 45:123.
  114. Ryvlin P, Philippon B, Cinotti L, et al. Functional neuroimaging strategy in temporal lobe epilepsy: a comparative study of 18FDG-PET and 99mTc-HMPAO-SPECT. Ann Neurol 1992; 31:650.
  115. Swartz BE, Tomiyasu U, Delgado-Escueta AV, et al. Neuroimaging in temporal lobe epilepsy: test sensitivity and relationships to pathology and postoperative outcome. Epilepsia 1992; 33:624.
  116. Salanova V, Markand O, Worth R. Temporal lobe epilepsy: analysis of patients with dual pathology. Acta Neurol Scand 2004; 109:126.
  117. la Fougère C, Rominger A, Förster S, et al. PET and SPECT in epilepsy: a critical review. Epilepsy Behav 2009; 15:50.
  118. Muzik O, Chugani DC, Juhász C, et al. Statistical parametric mapping: assessment of application in children. Neuroimage 2000; 12:538.
  119. Vinton AB, Carne R, Hicks RJ, et al. The extent of resection of FDG-PET hypometabolism relates to outcome of temporal lobectomy. Brain 2007; 130:548.
  120. Henry TR, Engel J Jr, Mazziotta JC. Clinical evaluation of interictal fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET in partial epilepsy. J Nucl Med 1993; 34:1892.
  121. Van Paesschen W, Dupont P, Sunaert S, et al. The use of SPECT and PET in routine clinical practice in epilepsy. Curr Opin Neurol 2007; 20:194.
  122. Lee SK, Lee SY, Kim KK, et al. Surgical outcome and prognostic factors of cryptogenic neocortical epilepsy. Ann Neurol 2005; 58:525.
  123. Willmann O, Wennberg R, May T, et al. The contribution of 18F-FDG PET in preoperative epilepsy surgery evaluation for patients with temporal lobe epilepsy A meta-analysis. Seizure 2007; 16:509.
  124. Carne RP, O'Brien TJ, Kilpatrick CJ, et al. MRI-negative PET-positive temporal lobe epilepsy: a distinct surgically remediable syndrome. Brain 2004; 127:2276.
  125. LoPinto-Khoury C, Sperling MR, Skidmore C, et al. Surgical outcome in PET-positive, MRI-negative patients with temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 2012; 53:342.
  126. Farooque P, Hirsch L, Levy S, et al. Surgical outcome in adolescents with mesial temporal sclerosis: Is it different? Epilepsy Behav 2017; 69:24.
  127. Muzik O, da Silva EA, Juhasz C, et al. Intracranial EEG versus flumazenil and glucose PET in children with extratemporal lobe epilepsy. Neurology 2000; 54:171.
  128. Lee N, Radtke RA, Gray L, et al. Neuronal migration disorders: positron emission tomography correlations. Ann Neurol 1994; 35:290.
  129. Juhász C, Chugani DC, Muzik O, et al. Relationship of flumazenil and glucose PET abnormalities to neocortical epilepsy surgery outcome. Neurology 2001; 56:1650.
  130. Kim SK, Lee DS, Lee SK, et al. Diagnostic performance of [18F]FDG-PET and ictal [99mTc]-HMPAO SPECT in occipital lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 2001; 42:1531.
  131. Lerner JT, Salamon N, Hauptman JS, et al. Assessment and surgical outcomes for mild type I and severe type II cortical dysplasia: a critical review and the UCLA experience. Epilepsia 2009; 50:1310.
  132. Knowlton RC. The role of FDG-PET, ictal SPECT, and MEG in the epilepsy surgery evaluation. Epilepsy Behav 2006; 8:91.
  133. Salamon N, Kung J, Shaw SJ, et al. FDG-PET/MRI coregistration improves detection of cortical dysplasia in patients with epilepsy. Neurology 2008; 71:1594.
  134. Chassoux F, Rodrigo S, Semah F, et al. FDG-PET improves surgical outcome in negative MRI Taylor-type focal cortical dysplasias. Neurology 2010; 75:2168.
  135. Rubí S, Setoain X, Donaire A, et al. Validation of FDG-PET/MRI coregistration in nonlesional refractory childhood epilepsy. Epilepsia 2011; 52:2216.
  136. Kaneko K, Sasaki M, Morioka T, et al. Pre-surgical identification of epileptogenic areas in temporal lobe epilepsy by 123I-iomazenil SPECT: a comparison with IMP SPECT and FDG PET. Nucl Med Commun 2006; 27:893.
  137. Umeoka S, Matsuda K, Baba K, et al. Usefulness of 123I-iomazenil single-photon emission computed tomography in discriminating between mesial and lateral temporal lobe epilepsy in patients in whom magnetic resonance imaging demonstrates normal findings. J Neurosurg 2007; 107:352.
  138. Fedi M, Reutens D, Okazawa H, et al. Localizing value of alpha-methyl-L-tryptophan PET in intractable epilepsy of neocortical origin. Neurology 2001; 57:1629.
  139. Juhász C, Chugani HT. Imaging the epileptic brain with positron emission tomography. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2003; 13:705.
  140. Kumar JS, Mann JJ. PET tracers for 5-HT(1A) receptors and uses thereof. Drug Discov Today 2007; 12:748.
  141. Didelot A, Ryvlin P, Lothe A, et al. PET imaging of brain 5-HT1A receptors in the preoperative evaluation of temporal lobe epilepsy. Brain 2008; 131:2751.
  142. Liew CJ, Lim YM, Bonwetsch R, et al. 18F-FCWAY and 18F-FDG PET in MRI-negative temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 2009; 50:234.
  143. Juhász C, Asano E, Shah A, et al. Focal decreases of cortical GABAA receptor binding remote from the primary seizure focus: what do they indicate? Epilepsia 2009; 50:240.
  144. Kasper BS, Struffert T, Kasper EM, et al. 18Fluoroethyl-L-tyrosine-PET in long-term epilepsy associated glioneuronal tumors. Epilepsia 2011; 52:35.
  145. Kuruva M, Moncayo VM, Peterson RB. PET and SPECT Imaging of Epilepsy: Technical Considerations, Pathologies, and Pitfalls. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2020; 41:551.
  146. Hogan RE, Lowe VJ, Bucholz RD. Triple-technique (MR imaging, single-photon emission CT, and CT) coregistration for image-guided surgical evaluation of patients with intractable epilepsy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1999; 20:1054.
  147. Spanaki MV, Zubal IG, MacMullan J, Spencer SS. Periictal SPECT localization verified by simultaneous intracranial EEG. Epilepsia 1999; 40:267.
  148. Rowe CC, Berkovic SF, Sia ST, et al. Localization of epileptic foci with postictal single photon emission computed tomography. Ann Neurol 1989; 26:660.
  149. Rowe CC, Berkovic SF, Austin MC, et al. Patterns of postictal cerebral blood flow in temporal lobe epilepsy: qualitative and quantitative analysis. Neurology 1991; 41:1096.
  150. Kazemi NJ, Worrell GA, Stead SM, et al. Ictal SPECT statistical parametric mapping in temporal lobe epilepsy surgery. Neurology 2010; 74:70.
  151. Sulc V, Stykel S, Hanson DP, et al. Statistical SPECT processing in MRI-negative epilepsy surgery. Neurology 2014; 82:932.
  152. O'Brien TJ, So EL, Cascino GD, et al. Subtraction SPECT coregistered to MRI in focal malformations of cortical development: localization of the epileptogenic zone in epilepsy surgery candidates. Epilepsia 2004; 45:367.
  153. O'Brien TJ, So EL, Mullan BP, et al. Subtraction ictal SPECT co-registered to MRI improves clinical usefulness of SPECT in localizing the surgical seizure focus. Neurology 1998; 50:445.
  154. O'Brien TJ, So EL, Mullan BP, et al. Subtraction SPECT co-registered to MRI improves postictal SPECT localization of seizure foci. Neurology 1999; 52:137.
  155. von Oertzen TJ, Mormann F, Urbach H, et al. Prospective use of subtraction ictal SPECT coregistered to MRI (SISCOM) in presurgical evaluation of epilepsy. Epilepsia 2011; 52:2239.
  156. Lee JY, Joo EY, Park HS, et al. Repeated ictal SPECT in partial epilepsy patients: SISCOM analysis. Epilepsia 2011; 52:2249.
  157. Cascino GD, Buchhalter JR, Mullan BP, So EL. Ictal SPECT in nonlesional extratemporal epilepsy. Epilepsia 2004; 45 Suppl 4:32.
  158. Varghese GI, Purcaro MJ, Motelow JE, et al. Clinical use of ictal SPECT in secondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Brain 2009; 132:2102.
  159. Dupont P, Van Paesschen W, Palmini A, et al. Ictal perfusion patterns associated with single MRI-visible focal dysplastic lesions: implications for the noninvasive delineation of the epileptogenic zone. Epilepsia 2006; 47:1550.
  160. Lewis PJ, Siegel A, Siegel AM, et al. Does performing image registration and subtraction in ictal brain SPECT help localize neocortical seizures? J Nucl Med 2000; 41:1619.
  161. Newton MR, Berkovic SF, Austin MC, et al. SPECT in the localisation of extratemporal and temporal seizure foci. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1995; 59:26.
  162. Devous MD Sr, Thisted RA, Morgan GF, et al. SPECT brain imaging in epilepsy: a meta-analysis. J Nucl Med 1998; 39:285.
  163. Van Paesschen W. Ictal SPECT. Epilepsia 2004; 45 Suppl 4:35.
  164. Van Paesschen W, Dupont P, Van Driel G, et al. SPECT perfusion changes during complex partial seizures in patients with hippocampal sclerosis. Brain 2003; 126:1103.
  165. Lee SK, Lee SY, Yun CH, et al. Ictal SPECT in neocortical epilepsies: clinical usefulness and factors affecting the pattern of hyperperfusion. Neuroradiology 2006; 48:678.
  166. Gallen CC, Hirschkoff EC, Buchanan DS. Magnetoencephalography and magnetic source imaging. Capabilities and limitations. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 1995; 5:227.
  167. Ricci GB, Romani GL, Salustri C, et al. Study of focal epilepsy by multichannel neuromagnetic measurements. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1987; 66:358.
  168. Ebersole JS. Magnetoencephalography/magnetic source imaging in the assessment of patients with epilepsy. Epilepsia 1997; 38 Suppl 4:S1.
  169. Baumgartner C, Pataraia E. Revisiting the role of magnetoencephalography in epilepsy. Curr Opin Neurol 2006; 19:181.
  170. Knowlton RC, Shih J. Magnetoencephalography in epilepsy. Epilepsia 2004; 45 Suppl 4:61.
  171. Knowlton RC, Laxer KD, Aminoff MJ, et al. Magnetoencephalography in partial epilepsy: clinical yield and localization accuracy. Ann Neurol 1997; 42:622.
  172. Shiraishi H, Watanabe Y, Watanabe M, et al. Interictal and ictal magnetoencephalographic study in patients with medial frontal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 2001; 42:875.
  173. de Jongh A, de Munck JC, Gonçalves SI, Ossenblok P. Differences in MEG/EEG epileptic spike yields explained by regional differences in signal-to-noise ratios. J Clin Neurophysiol 2005; 22:153.
  174. Englot DJ, Nagarajan SS, Imber BS, et al. Epileptogenic zone localization using magnetoencephalography predicts seizure freedom in epilepsy surgery. Epilepsia 2015; 56:949.
  175. RamachandranNair R, Otsubo H, Shroff MM, et al. MEG predicts outcome following surgery for intractable epilepsy in children with normal or nonfocal MRI findings. Epilepsia 2007; 48:149.
  176. Knowlton RC, Razdan SN, Limdi N, et al. Effect of epilepsy magnetic source imaging on intracranial electrode placement. Ann Neurol 2009; 65:716.
  177. Seo JH, Holland K, Rose D, et al. Multimodality imaging in the surgical treatment of children with nonlesional epilepsy. Neurology 2011; 76:41.
  178. De Tiège X, Carrette E, Legros B, et al. Clinical added value of magnetic source imaging in the presurgical evaluation of refractory focal epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2012; 83:417.
  179. Jung J, Bouet R, Delpuech C, et al. The value of magnetoencephalography for seizure-onset zone localization in magnetic resonance imaging-negative partial epilepsy. Brain 2013; 136:3176.
  180. Mohamed IS, Bouthillier A, Bérubé A, et al. The clinical impact of integration of magnetoencephalography in the presurgical workup for refractory nonlesional epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav 2018; 79:34.
  181. Amo C, Saldaña C, Hidalgo MG, et al. Magnetoencephalographic localization of peritumoral temporal epileptic focus previous surgical resection. Seizure 2003; 12:19.
  182. Otsubo H, Ochi A, Elliott I, et al. MEG predicts epileptic zone in lesional extrahippocampal epilepsy: 12 pediatric surgery cases. Epilepsia 2001; 42:1523.
  183. Stefan H, Hammen T. Cavernous haemangiomas, epilepsy and treatment strategies. Acta Neurol Scand 2004; 110:393.
  184. Widjaja E, Zarei Mahmoodabadi S, Otsubo H, et al. Subcortical alterations in tissue microstructure adjacent to focal cortical dysplasia: detection at diffusion-tensor MR imaging by using magnetoencephalographic dipole cluster localization. Radiology 2009; 251:206.
  185. Stefan H, Wu X, Buchfelder M, et al. MEG in frontal lobe epilepsies: localization and postoperative outcome. Epilepsia 2011; 52:2233.
  186. Iida K, Otsubo H, Mohamed IS, et al. Characterizing magnetoencephalographic spike sources in children with tuberous sclerosis complex. Epilepsia 2005; 46:1510.
  187. Stefan H, Nimsky C, Scheler G, et al. Periventricular nodular heterotopia: A challenge for epilepsy surgery. Seizure 2007; 16:81.
  188. Stefan H, Hummel C, Hopfengärtner R, et al. Magnetoencephalography in extratemporal epilepsy. J Clin Neurophysiol 2000; 17:190.
  189. Mohamed IS, Otsubo H, Ochi A, et al. Utility of magnetoencephalography in the evaluation of recurrent seizures after epilepsy surgery. Epilepsia 2007; 48:2150.
  190. Kirchberger K, Hummel C, Stefan H. Postoperative multichannel magnetoencephalography in patients with recurrent seizures after epilepsy surgery. Acta Neurol Scand 1998; 98:1.
  191. Stefan H, Hummel C, Scheler G, et al. Magnetic brain source imaging of focal epileptic activity: a synopsis of 455 cases. Brain 2003; 126:2396.
  192. Pataraia E, Simos PG, Castillo EM, et al. Does magnetoencephalography add to scalp video-EEG as a diagnostic tool in epilepsy surgery? Neurology 2004; 62:943.
  193. Knowlton RC, Elgavish RA, Limdi N, et al. Functional imaging: I. Relative predictive value of intracranial electroencephalography. Ann Neurol 2008; 64:25.
  194. Knowlton RC, Elgavish RA, Bartolucci A, et al. Functional imaging: II. Prediction of epilepsy surgery outcome. Ann Neurol 2008; 64:35.
  195. Doss RC, Zhang W, Risse GL, Dickens DL. Lateralizing language with magnetic source imaging: validation based on the Wada test. Epilepsia 2009; 50:2242.
  196. McDonald CR, Thesen T, Hagler DJ Jr, et al. Distributed source modeling of language with magnetoencephalography: application to patients with intractable epilepsy. Epilepsia 2009; 50:2256.
  197. Findlay AM, Ambrose JB, Cahn-Weiner DA, et al. Dynamics of hemispheric dominance for language assessed by magnetoencephalographic imaging. Ann Neurol 2012; 71:668.
  198. Mégevand P, Seeck M. Electric source imaging for presurgical epilepsy evaluation: current status and future prospects. Expert Rev Med Devices 2020; 17:405.
  199. Sharma P, Scherg M, Pinborg LH, et al. Ictal and interictal electric source imaging in pre-surgical evaluation: a prospective study. Eur J Neurol 2018; 25:1154.
  200. Mégevand P, Spinelli L, Genetti M, et al. Electric source imaging of interictal activity accurately localises the seizure onset zone. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2014; 85:38.
  201. Lascano AM, Perneger T, Vulliemoz S, et al. Yield of MRI, high-density electric source imaging (HD-ESI), SPECT and PET in epilepsy surgery candidates. Clin Neurophysiol 2016; 127:150.
Topic 2228 Version 30.0

References