Diagnostic Accuracy of Arterial Spin-Labeling MR Imaging in Detecting the Epileptogenic Zone: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Krumholz A,
   3. Wiebe S,
   4. Gronseth G, et al

   . American Epilepsy Society. 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;69:1996–2007 doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000285084.93652.43 pmid:18025394

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
2. 2.↵
   2. van Donselaar CA,
   3. Schimsheimer RJ,
   4. Geerts AT, et al

   . Value of the electroencephalogram in adult patients with untreated idiopathic first seizures. Arch Neurol 1992;49:231–37 doi:10.1001/archneur.1992.00530270045017 pmid:1536624

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   2. Fabene PF,
   3. Marzola P,
   4. Sbarbati A, et al

   . Magnetic resonance imaging of changes elicited by status epilepticus in the rat brain: diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted images, regional blood volume maps, and direct correlation with tissue and cell damage. Neuroimage 2003;18:375–89 doi:10.1016/S1053-8119(02)00025-3 pmid:12595191

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Marchi N,
   3. Angelov L,
   4. Masaryk T, et al

   . Seizure-promoting effect of blood-brain barrier disruption. Epilepsia 2007;48:732–42 doi:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2007.00988.x pmid:17319915

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   2. Choy M,
   3. Wells JA,
   4. Thomas DL, et al

   . Cerebral blood flow changes during pilocarpine-induced status epilepticus activity in the rat hippocampus. Exp Neurol 2010;225:196–201 doi:10.1016/j.expneurol.2010.06.015 pmid:20599541

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Choy M,
   3. Cheung KK,
   4. Thomas DL, et al

   . Quantitative MRI predicts status epilepticus-induced hippocampal injury in the lithium–pilocarpine rat model. Epilepsy Res 2010;88:221–30 doi:10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2009.11.013 pmid:20044241

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   2. Szabo K,
   3. Poepel A,
   4. Pohlmann-Eden B, et al

   . Diffusion-weighted and perfusion MRI demonstrates parenchymal changes in complex partial status epilepticus. Brain 2005;128:1369–76 doi:10.1093/brain/awh454 pmid:15743871

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   2. El-Koussy M,
   3. Mathis J,
   4. Lövblad K, et al

   . Focal status epilepticus: follow-up by perfusion- and diffusion MRI. Eur Radiol 2002;12:568–74 doi:10.1007/s003300100999 pmid:11870471

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   2. Brodie MJ,
   3. Kwan P

   . Staged approach to epilepsy management. Neurology 2002;58:S2–S8 doi:10.1212/wnl.58.8_suppl_5.s2 pmid:11971127

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.↵
    2. Benbadis SR,
    3. Tatum WO,
    4. Vale FL

    . When drugs don't work: an algorithmic approach to medically intractable epilepsy. Neurology 2000;55:1780–84 doi:10.1212/wnl.55.12.1780 pmid:11188984

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    2. Wiebe S,
    3. Blume WT,
    4. Girvin JP, et al

    . A randomized, controlled trial of surgery for temporal-lobe epilepsy. N Engl J Med 2001;345:311–18 doi:10.1056/NEJM200108023450501 pmid:11484687

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    2. Cukiert A,
    3. Cukiert CM,
    4. Argentoni M, et al

    . Outcome after corticoamygdalohippocampectomy in patients with refractory temporal lobe epilepsy and mesial temporal sclerosis without preoperative ictal recording. Epilepsia 2009;50:1371–76 doi:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2008.01738.x pmid:18717712

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Jones AL,
    3. Cascino GD

    . Evidence on use of neuroimaging for surgical treatment of temporal lobe epilepsy. JAMA Neurol 2016;73:464–70 doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2015.4996 pmid:26926529

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. LoPinto-Khoury C,
    3. Sperling MR,
    4. Skidmore C, et al

    . Surgical outcome in PET-positive, MRI-negative patients with temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 2012;53:342–48 doi:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2011.03359.x pmid:22192050

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Sulc V,
    3. Stykel S,
    4. Hanson DP, et al

    . Statistical SPECT processing in MRI-negative epilepsy surgery. Neurology 2014;82:932–39 doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000000209 pmid:24532274

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    2. Haller S,
    3. Zaharchuk G,
    4. Thomas DL, et al

    . Arterial spin labeling perfusion of the brain: emerging clinical applications. Radiology 2016;281:337–56 doi:10.1148/radiol.2016150789 pmid:27755938

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    2. Kong LM,
    3. Zeng JY,
    4. Zheng WB, et al

    . Effects of acute alcohol consumption on the human brain: diffusional kurtosis imaging and arterial spin-labeling study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:641–47 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5992 pmid:30872417

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
18. 18.↵
    2. Jiang J,
    3. Zhao L,
    4. Zhang Y, et al

    . Comparative analysis of arterial spin labeling and dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion imaging for quantitative perfusion measurements of brain tumors. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2014;7:2790–99 pmid:25031698

    PubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Pizzini FB,
    3. Farace P,
    4. Manganotti P, et al

    . Cerebral perfusion alterations in epileptic patients during peri-ictal and post-ictal phase: PASL vs DSC-MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 2013;31:1001–05 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2013.03.023 pmid:23623332

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    2. Ye FQ,
    3. Berman KF,
    4. Ellmore T, et al

    . H215O PET validation of steady-state arterial spin tagging cerebral blood flow measurements in humans. Magn Reson Med 2000;44:450–56 doi:10.1002/1522-2594(200009)44:3<450::AID-MRM16>3.0.CO;2-0 pmid:10975898

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
21. 21.↵
    2. Galazzo IB,
    3. Mattoli MV,
    4. Pizzini FB, et al

    . Cerebral metabolism and perfusion in MR-negative individuals with refractory focal epilepsy assessed by simultaneous acquisition of (18)F-FDG PET and arterial spin labeling. Neuroimage Clin 2016;11:648–57 doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2016.04.005 pmid:27222796

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    2. Whiting PF,
    3. Rutjes AW,
    4. Westwood ME, et al

    . QUADAS-2 Group. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011;155:529–36 doi:10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009 pmid:22007046

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    2. van Houwelingen HC,
    3. Arends LR,
    4. Stijnen T

    . Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Stat Med 2002;21:589–624 doi:10.1002/sim.1040 pmid:11836738

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    2. Huedo-Medina TB,
    3. Sánchez-Meca J,
    4. Marín-Martínez F, et al

    . Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I² index? Psychol Methods 2006;11:193–206 doi:10.1037/1082-989X.11.2.193 pmid:16784338

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    2. van Aert RC,
    3. Wicherts JM,
    4. van Assen MA

    . Publication bias examined in meta-analyses from psychology and medicine: a meta-meta-analysis. PLoS One 2019;14:e0215052 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0215052 pmid:30978228

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    2. Sierra-Marcos A,
    3. Carreño M,
    4. Setoain X, et al

    . Accuracy of arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) perfusion in detecting the epileptogenic zone in patients with drug-resistant neocortical epilepsy: comparison with electrophysiological data, structural MRI, SISCOM and FDG-PET. Eur J Neurol 2016;23:160–67 doi:10.1111/ene.12826 pmid:26346555

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Kim BS,
    3. Lee ST,
    4. Yun TJ, et al

    . Capability of arterial spin labeling MR imaging in localizing seizure focus in clinical seizure activity. Eur J Radiol 2016;85:1295–303 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.04.015 pmid:27235877

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    2. Gaxiola-Valdez I,
    3. Singh S,
    4. Perera T, et al

    . Seizure onset zone localization using postictal hypoperfusion detected by arterial spin labelling MRI. Brain 2017;140:2895–911 doi:10.1093/brain/awx241 pmid:29053782

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    2. Shang K,
    3. Wang J,
    4. Fan X, et al

    . Clinical value of hybrid TOF-PET/MR imaging-based multiparametric imaging in localizing seizure focus in patients with MRI-negative temporal lobe epilepsy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018;39:1791–98 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5814 pmid:30237304

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    2. Lee SM,
    3. Kwon S,
    4. Lee YJ

    . Diagnostic usefulness of arterial spin labeling in MR negative children with new onset seizures. Seizure 2019;65:151–58 doi:10.1016/j.seizure.2019.01.024 pmid:30718217

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    2. Lee DS,
    3. Lee SK,
    4. Kim SK, et al

    . Late postictal residual perfusion abnormality in epileptogenic zone found on 6-hour postictal SPECT. Neurology 2000;55:835–41 doi:10.1212/wnl.55.6.835 pmid:10994005

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    2. Ali II,
    3. Pirzada NA,
    4. Vaughn BV

    . Periodic lateralized epileptiform discharges after complex partial status epilepticus associated with increased focal cerebral blood flow. J Clin Neurophysiol 2001;18:565–69 doi:10.1097/00004691-200111000-00007 pmid:11779970

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
33. 33.↵
    2. Blauwblomme T,
    3. Boddaert N,
    4. Chémaly N, et al

    . Arterial spin labeling MRI: a step forward in non-invasive delineation of focal cortical dysplasia in children. Epilepsy Res 2014;108:1932–39 doi:10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2014.09.029 pmid:25454505

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    2. Pendse N,
    3. Wissmeyer M,
    4. Altrichter S, et al

    . Interictal arterial spin-labeling MRI perfusion in intractable epilepsy. J Neuroradiol 2010;37:60–63 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2009.05.006 pmid:19674791

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    2. Lim YM,
    3. Cho YW,
    4. Shamim S, et al

    . Usefulness of pulsed arterial spin labeling MR imaging in mesial temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsy Res 2008;82:183–89 doi:10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2008.08.001 pmid:19041041

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
36. 36.↵
    2. Farrell JS,
    3. Gaxiola-Valdez I,
    4. Wolff MD, et al

    . Postictal behavioural impairments are due to a severe prolonged hypoperfusion/hypoxia event that is COX-2 dependent. ELife 2016;5:e19352 doi:10.7554/eLife.19352 pmid:27874832

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    2. Desai A,
    3. Bekelis K,
    4. Thadani VM, et al

    . Interictal PET and ictal subtraction SPECT: sensitivity in the detection of seizure foci in patients with medically intractable epilepsy. Epilepsia 2013;54:341–50 doi:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2012.03686.x pmid:23030361

    CrossRefPubMed
38. 38.↵
    2. Pollock JM,
    3. Whitlow CT,
    4. Tan H, et al

    . Pulsed arterial spin-labeled MR imaging evaluation of tuberous sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:815–20 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1428 pmid:19147711

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
39. 39.↵
    2. Carmichael DW,
    3. Hamandi K,
    4. Laufs H, et al

    . An investigation of the relationship between BOLD and perfusion signal changes during epileptic generalised spike wave activity. Magn Reson Imaging 2008;26:870–73 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2008.01.041 pmid:18501544

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
40. 40.↵
    2. Yin C,
    3. Zhang X,
    4. Chen Z, et al

    . Detection and localization of interictal ripples with magnetoencephalography in the presurgical evaluation of drug-resistant insular epilepsy. Brain Res 2019;1706:147–56 doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2018.11.006 pmid:30408475

    CrossRefPubMed