Accuracy and spatial properties of distributed magnetic source imaging techniques in the investigation of focal epilepsy patients.

Source localization of interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs) is clinically useful in the presurgical workup of epilepsy patients. We aimed to compare the performance of four different distributed magnetic source imaging (dMSI) approaches: Minimum norm estimate (MNE), dynamic statistical parametric mapping (dSPM), standardized low-resolution electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA), and coherent maximum entropy on the mean (cMEM). We also evaluated whether a simple average of maps obtained from multiple inverse solutions (Ave) can improve localization accuracy. We analyzed dMSI of 206 IEDs derived from magnetoencephalography recordings in 28 focal epilepsy patients who had a well-defined focus determined through intracranial EEG (iEEG), epileptogenic MRI lesions or surgical resection. dMSI accuracy and spatial properties were quantitatively estimated as: (a) distance from the epilepsy focus, (b) reproducibility, (c) spatial dispersion (SD), (d) map extension, and (e) effect of thresholding on map properties. Clinical performance was excellent for all methods (median distance from the focus MNE = 2.4 mm; sLORETA = 3.5 mm; cMEM = 3.5 mm; dSPM = 6.8 mm, Ave = 0 mm). Ave showed the lowest distance between the map maximum and epilepsy focus (Dmin lower than cMEM, MNE, and dSPM, p = .021, p = .008, p < .001, respectively). cMEM showed the best spatial features, with lowest SD outside the focus (SD lower than all other methods, p < .001 consistently) and high contrast between the generator and surrounding regions. The average map Ave provided the best localization accuracy, whereas cMEM exhibited the lowest amount of spurious distant activity. dMSI techniques have the potential to significantly improve identification of iEEG targets and to guide surgical planning, especially when multiple methods are combined.

Effects of Independent Component Analysis on Magnetoencephalography Source Localization in Pre-surgical Frontal Lobe Epilepsy Patients.

Objective: Magnetoencephalography source imaging (MSI) of interictal epileptiform discharges (IED) is a useful presurgical tool in the evaluation of drug-resistant frontal lobe epilepsy (FLE) patients. Yet, failures in MSI can arise related to artifacts and to interference of background activity. Independent component analysis (ICA) is a popular denoising procedure but its clinical application remains challenging, as the selection of multiple independent components (IC) is controversial, operator dependent, and time consuming. We evaluated whether selecting only one IC of interest based on its similarity with the average IED field improves MSI in FLE. Methods: MSI was performed with the equivalent current dipole (ECD) technique and two distributed magnetic source imaging (dMSI) approaches: minimum norm estimate (MNE) and coherent Maximum Entropy on the Mean (cMEM). MSI accuracy was evaluated under three conditions: (1) ICA of continuous data (Cont_ICA), (2) ICA at the time of IED (IED_ICA), and (3) without ICA (No_ICA). Localization performance was quantitatively measured as actual distance of the source maximum in relation to the focus (Dmin), and spatial dispersion (SD) for dMSI. Results: After ICA, ECD Dmin did not change significantly (p > 0.200). For both dMSI techniques, ICA application worsened the source localization accuracy. We observed a worsening of both MNE Dmin (p < 0.05, consistently) and MNE SD (p < 0.001, consistently) for both ICA approaches. A similar behaviour was observed for cMEM, for which, however, Cont_ICA seemed less detrimental. Conclusion: We demonstrated that a simplified ICA approach selecting one IC of interest in combination with distributed magnetic source imaging can be detrimental. More complex approaches may provide better results but would be rather difficult to apply in real-world clinical setting. In a broader perspective, caution should be taken in applying ICA for source localization of interictal activity. To ensure optimal and useful results, effort should focus on acquiring good quality data, minimizing artifacts, and determining optimal candidacy for MEG, rather than counting on data cleaning techniques.