Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (Apr 2021)

Spatial-Temporal Functional Mapping Combined With Cortico-Cortical Evoked Potentials in Predicting Cortical Stimulation Results

  • Yujing Wang,
  • Mark A. Hays,
  • Christopher Coogan,
  • Joon Y. Kang,
  • Adeen Flinker,
  • Ravindra Arya,
  • Ravindra Arya,
  • Anna Korzeniewska,
  • Nathan E. Crone

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2021.661976
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 15

Abstract

Read online

Functional human brain mapping is commonly performed during invasive monitoring with intracranial electroencephalographic (iEEG) electrodes prior to resective surgery for drug­ resistant epilepsy. The current gold standard, electrocortical stimulation mapping (ESM), is time ­consuming, sometimes elicits pain, and often induces after discharges or seizures. Moreover, there is a risk of overestimating eloquent areas due to propagation of the effects of stimulation to a broader network of language cortex. Passive iEEG spatial-temporal functional mapping (STFM) has recently emerged as a potential alternative to ESM. However, investigators have observed less correspondence between STFM and ESM maps of language than between their maps of motor function. We hypothesized that incongruities between ESM and STFM of language function may arise due to propagation of the effects of ESM to cortical areas having strong effective connectivity with the site of stimulation. We evaluated five patients who underwent invasive monitoring for seizure localization, whose language areas were identified using ESM. All patients performed a battery of language tasks during passive iEEG recordings. To estimate the effective connectivity of stimulation sites with a broader network of task-activated cortical sites, we measured cortico-cortical evoked potentials (CCEPs) elicited across all recording sites by single-pulse electrical stimulation at sites where ESM was performed at other times. With the combination of high gamma power as well as CCEPs results, we trained a logistic regression model to predict ESM results at individual electrode pairs. The average accuracy of the classifier using both STFM and CCEPs results combined was 87.7%, significantly higher than the one using STFM alone (71.8%), indicating that the correspondence between STFM and ESM results is greater when effective connectivity between ESM stimulation sites and task-activated sites is taken into consideration. These findings, though based on a small number of subjects to date, provide preliminary support for the hypothesis that incongruities between ESM and STFM may arise in part from propagation of stimulation effects to a broader network of cortical language sites activated by language tasks, and suggest that more studies, with larger numbers of patients, are needed to understand the utility of both mapping techniques in clinical practice.

Keywords