Understanding Stakeholder Preference for Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: A Conjoint Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing numbers of women with unilateral breast cancer undergoing CPM, quantitative evidence of all stakeholder preferences regarding CPM is lacking, particularly for healthy volunteers. Conjoint analysis, a marketing tool, can be used to quantify tradeoffs surrounding CPM. STUDY DESIGN: The objective of this study was to quantify preferences for aspects of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) decision-making process among key stakeholders. Healthy volunteers, women with cancer (WwCa), surgical oncologists, and plastic surgeons were surveyed with the same conjoint simulation exercise. Respondents chose between either single (SM) or double (DM) mastectomy under varying recurrence and complication rates, surveillance, and symmetry conditions. Hierarchical Bayesian models calculated partworth utilities and importance scores. RESULTS: Overall, 1,244 respondents participated. The top 3 important factors for all stakeholders were surgical complication rates after DM, type of surgery (SM vs DM) independent of other variables, and 10-year future contralateral cancer risk after SM. HV and surgeons placed greatest importance on high rates of surgical complications after DM. WwCa preferred DM, regardless of complication risk or low rates of a 10-year future cancer episode after SM. Surgical oncologists strongly preferred SM and were more accepting of future cancer risk of 3% or 10% than other stakeholders. Symmetry and need for surveillance were least important factors for all stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: The threshold of acceptability for future cancer episodes and risk tolerance for complications varies by stakeholder, with a profound influence upon WwCA. Current findings suggest room for improved provider and patient alignment through behavioral techniques, such as framing, meanwhile highlighting changes in risk perception after a breast cancer diagnosis.

Thyroid Lobectomy for T1b-T2 Papillary Thyroid Cancer with High-Risk Features.

BACKGROUND: Thyroid lobectomy (TL) has been proposed as definitive surgical treatment for papillary thyroid cancers (PTC) up to 4 cm. This study evaluates the use and appropriateness of TL for T1b and T2 PTC. STUDY DESIGN: The National Cancer Database was interrogated for adult patients having TL for T1b-T2 PTC between 2004 and 2014. Patients who should have undergone total thyroidectomy (TT) instead of lobectomy based on high-risk tumor features were identified. The 2 groups were compared for clinical and demographic characteristics, and overall survival. RESULTS: Of 8,083 patients undergoing lobectomy, 1,552 patients had high-risk features and should have undergone TT. These included 194 with cN1, 571 with pN1, 307 with lymphovascular invasion (LVI), 645 with extra thyroidal extension (ETE), 567 with positive margins, 42 with poorly differentiated PTC, and 25 with M1 disease. At 10 years of follow-up, 92.4% of appropriate lobectomy (aTL) patients were alive compared with 88.5% of inappropriate lobectomy (iTL) patients (p < 0.001). On univariate and multivariable Cox survival analysis, age greater than 45 years, male sex, comorbidities, government or no insurance, low income, and tumor size >2 cm were associated with poorer survival (all p < 0.05). Thyroid lobectomy patients with high-risk features had significantly higher mortality on unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 1.98, 95% CI 1.52 to 2.59, p < 0.001) and adjusted survival analysis (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.58, p < 0.001). Total thyroidectomy with radioiodine treatment had improved overall survival in comparison to iTL (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A substantial number of patients (19.2%) with tumor size >1 cm and high-risk features undergo thyroid lobectomy for PTC. Exclusion of high-risk features is important when adopting lobectomy as the definitive surgical therapy for T1b and T2 PTC because they have a potential adverse effect on long-term survival.

Impact of Contralateral Symmetry Procedures on Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes following Unilateral Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: One aim of unilateral postmastectomy breast reconstruction (BR) is to restore symmetry with the contralateral breast. As such, unilateral prosthetic reconstruction often requires a contralateral symmetry procedure (CSP). There is sparse literature on the impact of CSPs on long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) such as satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aims to describe PROs following CSPs, using a validated PRO tool, BREAST-Q. The hypothesis is that CSPs are associated with greater patient-reported satisfaction and HRQoL. METHODS: This study is a single institutional analysis of prospectively collected BREAST-Q scores of patients who underwent unilateral prosthetic BR during 2011 to 2015. Women 18 years and older with BREAST-Q scores measured ≥ 9months after BR with or without CSP(s) at the time of expander replacement were included. Patients were classified into four subcohorts: augmentation, mastopexy, reduction, and no symmetry procedure (controls). Sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, and BREAST-Q scores were analyzed. Multivariable linear regression was performed. RESULTS: Of 553 patients, 67 (12%) underwent contralateral augmentation, 68 (12%) mastopexy, 93(17%) reduction, and 325 (59%) were controls. Mean follow-up time was 52 months. Satisfaction with breast and outcomes were higher in the augmentation compared with the control groups (p = 0.01). On multivariable analysis, augmentation remained an independent predictor of satisfaction with breast (p = 0.04). Physical well-being scores were lower for contralateral mastopexy and reduction compared with the controls with a trend toward statistical significance on multivariable models. Psychological and sexual well-being was similar across groups. CONCLUSION: Prosthetic reconstruction with contralateral breast augmentation was associated with greater satisfaction with breast and reconstructive outcome. In contrast, breast reduction and mastopexy procedures demonstrated equivalent satisfaction with breasts compared with controls but may be associated with lower physical well-being. Such information can be used to improve the shared decision-making process for women who choose unilateral prosthetic BR.

National trends in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with locally advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Women with unilateral early-stage breast cancer are increasingly choosing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) despite the absence of survival benefits and increased risk of surgical complications. Data are lacking on whether this trend extends to women with clinically locally advanced nonmetastatic (cT4M0) cancer. This study aims to estimate national CPM trends in women with unilateral cT4M0 breast cancer. METHODS: Women aged ≥ 18 years, who underwent mastectomy during 2004 to 2014 for unilateral cT4M0 breast cancer were identified using the National Cancer Database and grouped as all locally advanced (T4), chest wall invasion, skin nodule/ulceration, or both (T4abc), and inflammatory (T4d) cancer. Poisson regression for trends and logistic modeling for predictors of CPM were performed. RESULTS: Of 23 943 women, 41% had T4abc disease and 35% T4d. Cumulative CPM rates were 15%, 23%, and 18%, for the T4abc, T4d, and all T4 groups, respectively. Trend analysis revealed a significant upsurge in CPM demonstrating 12% annual growth for T4abc tumors, 8% for T4d and 9% for all T4 (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing numbers of women with unilateral cT4M0 breast cancer are undergoing CPM. This rising trend warrants further research to understand stakeholders' preferences in surgical decision-making for women with locally advanced breast cancer.

The Influence of Physician Payments on the Method of Breast Reconstruction: A National Claims Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Flap-based breast reconstruction demands greater operative labor and offers superior patient-reported outcomes compared with implants. However, use of implants continues to outpace flaps, with some suggesting inadequate remuneration as one barrier. This study aims to characterize market variation in the ratio of implants to flaps and assess correlation with physician payments. METHODS: Using the Blue Health Intelligence database from 2009 to 2013, patients were identified who underwent tissue expander (i.e., implant) or free-flap breast reconstruction. The implant-to-flap ratio and physician payments were assessed using quadratic modeling. Matched bootstrapped samples from the early and late periods generated probability distributions, approximating the odds of surgeons switching reconstructive method. RESULTS: A total of 21,259 episodes of breast reconstruction occurred in 122 U.S. markets. The distribution of implant-to-flap ratio varied by market, ranging from the fifth percentile at 1.63 to the ninety-fifth percentile at 43.7 (median, 6.19). Modeling the implant-to-flap ratio versus implant payment showed a more elastic quadratic equation compared with the function for flap-to-implant ratio versus flap payment. Probability modeling demonstrated that switching the reconstructive method from implants to flaps with a 0.75 probability required a $1610 payment increase, whereas switching from flaps to implants at the same certainty occurred at a loss of $960. CONCLUSIONS: There was a correlation between the ratio of flaps to implants and physician reimbursement by market. Switching from implants to flaps required large surgeon payment increases. Despite a relative value unit schedule over twice as high for flaps, current flap reimbursements do not appear commensurate with physician effort.

Trends in Physician Payments for Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic breast reconstruction rates have risen in the United States, whereas autologous techniques have stagnated. Meanwhile, single-institution data demonstrate that physician payments for prosthetic reconstruction are rising, while payments for autologous techniques are unchanged. This study aims to assess payment trends and variation for tissue expander and free flap breast reconstruction. METHODS: The Blue Health Intelligence database was queried from 2009 to 2013, identifying women with claims for breast reconstruction. Trends in the incidence of surgery and physician reimbursement were characterized by method and year using regression models. RESULTS: There were 21,259 episodes of breast reconstruction, with a significant rise in tissue expander cases (incidence rate ratio, 1.09; p < 0.001) and an unchanged incidence of free flap cases (incidence rate ratio, 1.02; p = 0.222). Bilateral tissue expander cases reimbursed 1.32 times more than unilateral tissue expanders, whereas bilateral free flaps reimbursed 1.61 times more than unilateral variants. The total growth in adjusted tissue expander mean payments was 6.5 percent (from $2232 to $2378) compared with -1.8 percent (from $3858 to $3788) for free flaps. Linear modeling showed significant increases for tissue expander reimbursements only. Surgeon payments varied more for free flaps (the 25th to 75th percentile interquartile range was $2243 for free flaps versus $987 for tissue expanders). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of tissue expander cases and reimbursements rose over a period where the incidence of free flap cases and reimbursements plateaued. Reasons for stagnation in free flaps are unclear; however, the opportunity cost of performing this procedure may incentivize the alternative technique. Greater payment variation in autologous reconstruction suggests the opportunity for negotiation with payers.

Conceptual Considerations for Payment Bundling in Breast Reconstruction.

Rising health care costs and quality demands have driven both the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the private sector to seek innovations in health system design by placing institutions at financial risk. Novel care models, such as bundled reimbursement, aim to boost value though quality improvement and cost reduction. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation is leading the charge in this area with multiple pilots and mandates, including Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement. Other high-cost and high-volume procedures could be considered for bundling in the future, including breast reconstruction. In this article, conceptual considerations surrounding bundling of breast reconstruction are discussed.

National Breast Reconstruction Utilization in the Setting of Postmastectomy Radiotherapy.

Background Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is often deferred, when postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) is anticipated, due to high complication rates. Nonetheless, because of robust data supporting improved health-related quality of life associated with reconstruction, physicians and patients may be more accepting of tradeoffs. The current study explores national trends of IBR utilization rates and methods in the setting of PMRT, using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The study hypothesis is that prosthetic techniques have become the most common method of IBR in the setting of PMRT. Methods NCDB was queried from 2004 to 2013 for women, who underwent mastectomy with or without IBR. Patients were grouped according to PMRT status. Multivariate logistic regression was used to calculate odds of IBR in the setting of PMRT. Trend analyses were done for rates and methods of IBR using Poisson regression to determine incidence rate ratios (IRRs). Results In multivariate analysis, radiated patients were 30% less likely to receive IBR (p < 0.05). The rate increase in IBR was greater in radiated compared with nonradiated patients (IRR: 1.12 vs. 1.09). Rates of reconstruction increased more so in radiated compared with nonradiated patients for both implants (IRR 1.15 vs. 1.11) and autologous techniques (IRR 1.08 vs. 1.06). Autologous reconstructions were more common in those receiving PMRT until 2005 (p < 0.05), with no predominant technique thereafter. Conclusion Although IBR remains a relative contraindication, rates of IBR are increasing to a greater extent in patients receiving PMRT. Implants have surpassed autologous techniques as the most commonly used method of breast reconstruction in this setting.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Breast Reconstruction Options in the Setting of Postmastectomy Radiotherapy Using the BREAST-Q.

BACKGROUND: A consensus is lacking on a uniform reconstructive algorithm for patients with locally advanced breast cancer who require postmastectomy radiotherapy. Both delayed autologous and immediate prosthetic techniques have inherent advantages and complications. The study hypothesis is that implants are more cost effective than autologous reconstruction in the setting of postmastectomy radiotherapy because of immediate restoration of the breast mound. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis model using the payer perspective was created comparing delayed autologous and immediate prosthetic techniques against the do-nothing option of mastectomy without reconstruction. Costs were obtained from the 2010 Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. Effectiveness was determined using the BREAST-Q patient-reported outcome measure. A breast quality-adjusted life-year value was considered 1 year of perfect breast health-related quality of life. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for both treatments compared with the do-nothing option. RESULTS: BREAST-Q scores were obtained from patients who underwent immediate prosthetic reconstruction (n = 196), delayed autologous reconstruction (n = 76), and mastectomy alone (n = 71). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for immediate prosthetic and delayed autologous reconstruction compared with mastectomy alone were $57,906 and $102,509, respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for both treatment options decreased with increasing life expectancy. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with advanced breast cancer who require postmastectomy radiotherapy, immediate prosthetic-based breast reconstruction is a cost-effective approach. Despite high complication rates, implant use can be rationalized based on low cost and health-related quality-of-life benefit derived from early breast mound restoration. If greater life expectancy is anticipated, autologous transfer is cost effective as well and may be a superior option.

Quality of life among patients after bilateral prophylactic mastectomy: a systematic review of patient-reported outcomes.

PURPOSE: Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM) is effective in reducing the risk of breast cancer in women with a well-defined family history of breast cancer or in women with BRCA 1 or 2 mutations. Evaluating patient-reported outcomes following BPM are thus essential for evaluating success of BPM from patient's perspective. Our systematic review aimed to: (1) identify studies describing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients following BPM with or without reconstruction; (2) assess the effect of BPM with or without reconstruction on HRQOL; and (3) identify predictors of HRQOL post-BPM. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of literature using the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane databases were searched. RESULTS: The initial search resulted in 1082 studies; 22 of these studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Post-BPM, patients are satisfied with the outcomes and report high psychosocial well-being and positive body image. Sexual well-being and somatosensory function are most negatively affected. Vulnerability, psychological distress and preoperative cancer distress are significant negative predictors of quality of life and body image post-BPM. CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of high-quality data on outcomes of different HRQOL domains post-BPM. Future studies should strive to use validated and breast-specific PRO instruments for measuring HRQOL. This will facilitate shared decision-making by enabling surgeons to provide evidence-based answers to women contemplating BPM.

The Impact of Travel Distance on Breast Reconstruction in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate access to breast reconstruction was a motivating factor underlying passage of the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act. It remains unclear whether all patients interested in breast reconstruction undergo this procedure. The aim of this study was to determine whether geographic disparities are present that limit the rate and method of postmastectomy reconstruction. METHODS: Travel distance in miles between the patient's residence and the hospital reporting the case was used as a quantitative measure of geographic disparities. The American College of Surgeons National Cancer Database was queried for mastectomy with or without reconstruction performed from 1998 to 2011. Reconstructive procedures were categorized as implant or autologous techniques. Standard statistical tests including linear regression were performed. RESULTS: Patients who underwent breast reconstruction had to travel farther than those who had mastectomy alone (p < 0.01). A linear correlation was demonstrated between travel distance and reconstruction rates (p < 0.01). The mean distances traveled by patients who underwent reconstruction at community, comprehensive community, or academic programs were 10.3, 19.9, and 26.2 miles, respectively (p < 0.01). Reconstruction rates were significantly greater at academic programs. Patients traveled farther to undergo autologous compared with prosthetic reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Although greater patient awareness and insurance coverage have contributed to increased breast reconstruction rates in the United States, the presence of geographic barriers suggests an unmet need. Academic programs have the greatest reconstruction rates, but are located farther from patients' residences. Increasing the number of plastics surgeons, especially in community centers, would be one method of addressing this inequality.

Free Jejunal Flap for Pharyngoesophageal Reconstruction in Head and Neck Cancer Patients: An Evaluation of Donor-Site Complications.

BACKGROUND: Free jejunal transfer for pharyngoesophageal reconstruction has often been criticized for its associated donor-site morbidity. Conversely, the same argument has been invoked to support use of fasciocutaneous flaps, given their low incidence of donor-site complications. The purpose of the current study was to document donor-site complication rate with free jejunal flaps for pharyngoesophageal reconstruction, in the hands of an experienced surgeon. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for consecutive patients who underwent free jejunal transfer between 1992 and 2012 by the senior author (P.G.C.). Demographic data, abdominal complications, surgical characteristics of small bowel anastomoses, and postoperative bowel function were specifically noted. RESULTS: Overall, 92 jejunal flap reconstructions were performed in 90 patients. The mean follow-up time was 29 months. Twelve (13%) patients had prior abdominal surgery. Donor-site complications included ileus (n = 2), wound cellulitis (n = 1), wound dehiscence (n = 1), and small bowel obstruction (n = 1). Mean time to initiation of tube feeds after reconstruction was 5 days. A total of 77 (86.5%) patients were discharged on an oral diet. The perioperative mortality rate of 2% was not associated with any donor-site complication. CONCLUSION: Free jejunal transfer is associated with minimal and acceptable donor-site complication rates. The choice of flap for pharyngoesophageal reconstruction should be determined by the type of defect, potential recipient site complications, and the surgeon's familiarity with the flap. Potential donor-site complications should not be a deterrent for free jejunal flaps given the low rate described in this study.

Safety of the supraclavicular artery island flap in the setting of neck dissection and radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: The supraclavicular artery island flap (SAIF) has recently been repopularized as a versatile and reliable option for reconstruction of oncological head and neck defects. Prior ipsilateral neck dissection or irradiation is considered a relative contraindication to its use. The aim of this study was to describe the safety and utility of the SAIF for head and neck reconstruction in the setting of neck dissection and radiation. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of consecutive SAIF reconstructions at two institutions between May 2011 and 2014. In addition to demographic data, comorbidities, indications, surgical characteristics, data about radiation treatment, and neck dissection were specifically recorded. Donor and recipient site complications were noted. Fisher exact test was performed to analyze if neck dissection or radiation were associated with complications. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients underwent SAIF reconstruction for an array of head and neck defects. Donor site infection was noted in one patient. Recipient site complications included, wound dehiscence (n = 2), orocutaneous fistula (n = 1), carotid blowout (n = 1), and total flap loss (n = 1). There was no association between prior neck dissection or radiation treatment and flap loss (p = 1.00). CONCLUSION: The SAIF is safe for use in patients who have had an ipsilateral neck dissection involving level IV or V lymph nodes and/or radiation treatment to the neck. It can be used alone or in combination with other flaps for closure of a variety of head and neck defects.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of implants versus autologous perforator flaps using the BREAST-Q.

BACKGROUND: Reimbursement has been recognized as a physician barrier to autologous reconstruction. Autologous reconstructions are more expensive than prosthetic reconstructions, but provide greater health-related quality of life. The authors' hypothesis is that autologous tissue reconstructions are cost-effective compared with prosthetic techniques when considering health-related quality of life and patient satisfaction. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis from the payer perspective, including patient input, was performed for unilateral and bilateral reconstructions with deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps and implants. The effectiveness measure was derived using the BREAST-Q and interpreted as the cost for obtaining 1 year of perfect breast health-related quality-adjusted life-year. Costs were obtained from the 2010 Nationwide Inpatient Sample. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was generated. A sensitivity analysis for age and stage at diagnosis was performed. RESULTS: BREAST-Q scores from 309 patients with implants and 217 DIEP flap reconstructions were included. The additional cost for obtaining 1 year of perfect breast-related health for a unilateral DIEP flap compared with implant reconstruction was $11,941. For bilateral DIEP flaps compared with implant reconstructions, the cost for an additional breast health-related quality-adjusted life-year was $28,017. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the cost for an additional breast health-related quality-adjusted life-year for DIEP flaps compared with implants was less for younger patients and earlier stage breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: DIEP flaps are cost-effective compared with implants, especially for unilateral reconstructions. Cost-effectiveness of autologous techniques is maximized in women with longer life expectancy. Patient-reported outcomes findings can be incorporated into cost-effectiveness analyses to demonstrate the relative value of reconstructive procedures.

A phase 1 trial of oncolytic HSV-1, G207, given in combination with radiation for recurrent GBM demonstrates safety and radiographic responses.

G207, a mutant herpes simplex virus (HSV) type 1, is safe when inoculated into recurrent malignant glioma. We conducted a phase 1 trial of G207 to demonstrate the safety of stereotactic intratumoral administration when given 24 hours prior to a single 5 Gy radiation dose in patients with recurrent malignant glioma. Nine patients with progressive, recurrent malignant glioma despite standard therapy were included. Patients received one dose of G207 stereotactically inoculated into the multiple sites of the enhancing tumor margin and were then treated focally with 5 Gy radiation. Treatment was well tolerated, and no patient developed HSV encephalitis. The median interval between initial diagnosis and G207 inoculation was 18 months (mean: 23 months; range: 11-51 months). Six of the nine patients had stable disease or partial response for at least one time point. Three instances of marked radiographic response to treatment occurred. The median survival time from G207 inoculation until death was 7.5 months (95% confidence interval: 3.0-12.7). In conclusion, this study showed the safety and the potential for clinical response of single-dose oncolytic HSV therapy augmented with radiation in the treatment of malignant glioma patients. Additional studies with oncolytic HSV such as G207 in the treatment of human glioma are recommended.

Meta-analysis of hemorrhagic complications from ventriculostomy placement by neurosurgeons.

BACKGROUND: Ventriculostomy placement is an important diagnostic and therapeutic tool for neurosurgeons. Multiple authors have presented retrospective series of patients evaluating periprocedure hemorrhage. OBJECTIVE: We performed a meta-analysis of existing studies to determine a more accurate rate of hemorrhage. METHODS: A MEDLINE and PubMed search was performed to find all studies of 25 or more patients conducted since 1970 that found a hemorrhagic complication rate from placement of a ventriculostomy. Studies in which a non-neurosurgeon placed the ventriculostomy and studies involving premature infants were excluded. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were used to obtain data from 2428 ventriculostomy procedures. Hemorrhage was found after 203 procedures, and 52 of these hemorrhages were deemed significant by the authors. The cumulative rate of hemorrhage was 7.0% (95% confidence interval: 4.5%-9.4%), with P < .05. The cumulative rate of significant hemorrhage was 0.8% (95% confidence interval: 0.2%-1.4%) with P < .05. CONCLUSION: Based on our meta-analysis, the overall hemorrhagic complication rate from ventriculostomy placement by neurosurgeons is approximately 7%. The rate of significant hemorrhage from ventriculostomy placement is approximately 0.8%. Further prospective studies are warranted to better address this question.

Effect of epilepsy magnetic source imaging on intracranial electrode placement.

OBJECTIVE: Intracranial electroencephalography (ICEEG) with chronically implanted electrodes is a costly invasive diagnostic procedure that remains necessary for a large proportion of patients who undergo evaluation for epilepsy surgery. This study was designed to evaluate whether magnetic source imaging (MSI), a noninvasive test based on magnetoencephalography source localization, can supplement ICEEG by affecting electrode placement to improve sampling of the seizure onset zone(s). METHODS: Of 298 consecutive epilepsy surgery candidates (between 2001 and 2006), 160 patients were prospectively enrolled by insufficient localization from seizure monitoring and magnetic resonance imaging results. Before presenting MSI results, decisions were made whether to proceed with ICEEG, and if so, where to place electrodes such that the hypothetical seizure-onset zone would be sampled. MSI results were then provided with allowance of changes to the original plan. RESULTS: MSI indicated additional electrode coverage in 18 of 77 (23%) ICEEG cases. In 39% (95% confidence interval, 16.4-61.4), seizure-onset ICEEG patterns involved the additional electrodes indicated by MSI. Sixty-two patients underwent surgical resection based on ICEEG recording of seizures. Highly localized MSI was significantly associated with seizure-free outcome (mean, 3.4 years; minimum, >1 year) for the entire surgical population (n = 62). INTERPRETATION: MSI spike localization increases the chance that the seizure-onset zone is sampled when patients undergo ICEEG for presurgical epilepsy evaluations. The clinical impact of this effect, improving diagnostic yield of ICEEG, should be considered in surgery candidates who do not have satisfactory indication of epilepsy localization from seizure semiology, electroencephalogram, and magnetic resonance imaging.