4.2 Review

Role of MRI in patient selection for surgical treatment of intractable epilepsy in infancy

期刊

BRAIN & DEVELOPMENT
卷 35, 期 8, 页码 697-705

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.braindev.2013.03.009

关键词

Epilepsy surgery; MRI; Infants

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Epilepsy surgery is an effective treatment in selected patients with localization-related intractable epilepsy. The success of epilepsy surgery is in part dependent upon identification of a lesion on MRI. In infants, the surgical epileptogenic substrates include focal cortical dysplasia (FCD), hemimegalencephaly, tuberous sclerosis complex, Sturge Weber syndrome, hypoxic-ischemic or cerebrovascular injury and low-grade tumor. The sensitivity of MRI in identifying the epileptogenic substrate is influenced by the nature of the epileptogenic substrate, MRI technique and expertise of the interpreting physician. The MRI features of some lesions such as FCD may differ in infants compared to children and adults; the white matter adjacent to FCD may demonstrate lower T2 and higher T1 signal in some infants due to premature myelination, while in others, the white matter demonstrates higher T2 or lower T1 signal due to demyelination, dysmyelination or gliosis, similar to children and adults. The appearances of some lesions, such as FCD, may change with time, due to brain maturation or seizure related changes. MRI for patients with localization-related intractable epilepsy should have high-resolution, multiplanar and multisequence. In infants, volumetric T1 and high-resolution T2 imaging are recommended. FLAIR and proton density sequences are less helpful in infants due to lack of myelin in the white matter. The physician interpreting the scan should be familiar with the imaging appearances of epileptogenic substrates and may need to review the scan more than once if a lesion is not seen on initial inspection. (C) 2013 The Japanese Society of Child Neurology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据