Double Inversion Recovery Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Identifying Focal Cortical Dysplasia

Lily Wong-Kisiel, Jeffrey W. Britton, Robert J. Witte, Kristen M. Kelly-Williams, Amy L. Kotsenas, Karl N. Krecke, Robert E. Watson, Alice Patton, Dennis P. Hanson, Jayawant Mandrekar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Focal cortical dysplasia is commonly recognized in pediatric epilepsy surgery. Despite characteristic radiographic features, focal cortical dysplasia can be subtle on magnetic resonance imaging. Double inversion recovery acquisition suppresses the white matter signal, which may enhance visualization of abnormal features at the gray-white matter interface. We assessed the ability of double inversion recovery to distinguish focal cortical dysplasia from periventricular nodular heterotopia and normal brain. Methods: Patients with focal cortical dysplasia were identified from our patient database, as was a control group comprising patients with periventricular nodular heterotopia and healthy persons. A senior neuroradiologist reviewed all clinical images and classified them as patients with focal cortical dysplasia (n = 16) or control subjects (periventricular nodular heterotopia, n = 13; normal, n = 20). Four neuroradiologists reviewed the de-identified and randomized double inversion recovery and magnetization prepared rapid acquired gradient echoes (MPRAGE) sequences for each person and scored them as normal, focal cortical dysplasia, or periventricular nodular heterotopia. Results: Among individual reviewers, double inversion recovery showed sensitivity from 50% to 88% and specificity from 67% to 91% in detecting focal cortical dysplasia. The sensitivity was notably higher in reviewers with more clinical experience with the technique. Consensus agreement among the three most experienced reviewers gave a sensitivity of 88% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72% to 97%) and specificity of 88% (95% CI, 62% to 98%) for double inversion recovery and sensitivity of 44% (95% CI, 20% to 70%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI, 89% to 100%) for MPRAGE. Conclusions: Double inversion recovery is sensitive for detection of focal cortical dysplasia with experienced users, particularly when there is consensus agreement. The use of two clinically available magnetic resonance imaging acquisitions-double inversion recovery and another sequence with high specificity such as MPRAGE-would be complementary in the evaluation of lesional epilepsy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPediatric Neurology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Dec 4 2015

Fingerprint

Malformations of Cortical Development
Periventricular Nodular Heterotopia
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Confidence Intervals
Epilepsy
Databases
Pediatrics
Control Groups
Brain

Keywords

  • DIR
  • Focal cortical dysplasia
  • Focal epilepsy
  • MRI methods

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Developmental Neuroscience
  • Neurology

Cite this

Double Inversion Recovery Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Identifying Focal Cortical Dysplasia. / Wong-Kisiel, Lily; Britton, Jeffrey W.; Witte, Robert J.; Kelly-Williams, Kristen M.; Kotsenas, Amy L.; Krecke, Karl N.; Watson, Robert E.; Patton, Alice; Hanson, Dennis P.; Mandrekar, Jayawant.

In: Pediatric Neurology, 04.12.2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wong-Kisiel, Lily ; Britton, Jeffrey W. ; Witte, Robert J. ; Kelly-Williams, Kristen M. ; Kotsenas, Amy L. ; Krecke, Karl N. ; Watson, Robert E. ; Patton, Alice ; Hanson, Dennis P. ; Mandrekar, Jayawant. / Double Inversion Recovery Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Identifying Focal Cortical Dysplasia. In: Pediatric Neurology. 2015.
@article{5a8a7a04c0b84f348a8bc069fc8ab0a2,
title = "Double Inversion Recovery Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Identifying Focal Cortical Dysplasia",
abstract = "Background: Focal cortical dysplasia is commonly recognized in pediatric epilepsy surgery. Despite characteristic radiographic features, focal cortical dysplasia can be subtle on magnetic resonance imaging. Double inversion recovery acquisition suppresses the white matter signal, which may enhance visualization of abnormal features at the gray-white matter interface. We assessed the ability of double inversion recovery to distinguish focal cortical dysplasia from periventricular nodular heterotopia and normal brain. Methods: Patients with focal cortical dysplasia were identified from our patient database, as was a control group comprising patients with periventricular nodular heterotopia and healthy persons. A senior neuroradiologist reviewed all clinical images and classified them as patients with focal cortical dysplasia (n = 16) or control subjects (periventricular nodular heterotopia, n = 13; normal, n = 20). Four neuroradiologists reviewed the de-identified and randomized double inversion recovery and magnetization prepared rapid acquired gradient echoes (MPRAGE) sequences for each person and scored them as normal, focal cortical dysplasia, or periventricular nodular heterotopia. Results: Among individual reviewers, double inversion recovery showed sensitivity from 50{\%} to 88{\%} and specificity from 67{\%} to 91{\%} in detecting focal cortical dysplasia. The sensitivity was notably higher in reviewers with more clinical experience with the technique. Consensus agreement among the three most experienced reviewers gave a sensitivity of 88{\%} (95{\%} confidence interval [CI], 72{\%} to 97{\%}) and specificity of 88{\%} (95{\%} CI, 62{\%} to 98{\%}) for double inversion recovery and sensitivity of 44{\%} (95{\%} CI, 20{\%} to 70{\%}) and specificity of 100{\%} (95{\%} CI, 89{\%} to 100{\%}) for MPRAGE. Conclusions: Double inversion recovery is sensitive for detection of focal cortical dysplasia with experienced users, particularly when there is consensus agreement. The use of two clinically available magnetic resonance imaging acquisitions-double inversion recovery and another sequence with high specificity such as MPRAGE-would be complementary in the evaluation of lesional epilepsy.",
keywords = "DIR, Focal cortical dysplasia, Focal epilepsy, MRI methods",
author = "Lily Wong-Kisiel and Britton, {Jeffrey W.} and Witte, {Robert J.} and Kelly-Williams, {Kristen M.} and Kotsenas, {Amy L.} and Krecke, {Karl N.} and Watson, {Robert E.} and Alice Patton and Hanson, {Dennis P.} and Jayawant Mandrekar",
year = "2015",
month = "12",
day = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2016.04.013",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Pediatric Neurology",
issn = "0887-8994",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Double Inversion Recovery Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Identifying Focal Cortical Dysplasia

AU - Wong-Kisiel, Lily

AU - Britton, Jeffrey W.

AU - Witte, Robert J.

AU - Kelly-Williams, Kristen M.

AU - Kotsenas, Amy L.

AU - Krecke, Karl N.

AU - Watson, Robert E.

AU - Patton, Alice

AU - Hanson, Dennis P.

AU - Mandrekar, Jayawant

PY - 2015/12/4

Y1 - 2015/12/4

N2 - Background: Focal cortical dysplasia is commonly recognized in pediatric epilepsy surgery. Despite characteristic radiographic features, focal cortical dysplasia can be subtle on magnetic resonance imaging. Double inversion recovery acquisition suppresses the white matter signal, which may enhance visualization of abnormal features at the gray-white matter interface. We assessed the ability of double inversion recovery to distinguish focal cortical dysplasia from periventricular nodular heterotopia and normal brain. Methods: Patients with focal cortical dysplasia were identified from our patient database, as was a control group comprising patients with periventricular nodular heterotopia and healthy persons. A senior neuroradiologist reviewed all clinical images and classified them as patients with focal cortical dysplasia (n = 16) or control subjects (periventricular nodular heterotopia, n = 13; normal, n = 20). Four neuroradiologists reviewed the de-identified and randomized double inversion recovery and magnetization prepared rapid acquired gradient echoes (MPRAGE) sequences for each person and scored them as normal, focal cortical dysplasia, or periventricular nodular heterotopia. Results: Among individual reviewers, double inversion recovery showed sensitivity from 50% to 88% and specificity from 67% to 91% in detecting focal cortical dysplasia. The sensitivity was notably higher in reviewers with more clinical experience with the technique. Consensus agreement among the three most experienced reviewers gave a sensitivity of 88% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72% to 97%) and specificity of 88% (95% CI, 62% to 98%) for double inversion recovery and sensitivity of 44% (95% CI, 20% to 70%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI, 89% to 100%) for MPRAGE. Conclusions: Double inversion recovery is sensitive for detection of focal cortical dysplasia with experienced users, particularly when there is consensus agreement. The use of two clinically available magnetic resonance imaging acquisitions-double inversion recovery and another sequence with high specificity such as MPRAGE-would be complementary in the evaluation of lesional epilepsy.

AB - Background: Focal cortical dysplasia is commonly recognized in pediatric epilepsy surgery. Despite characteristic radiographic features, focal cortical dysplasia can be subtle on magnetic resonance imaging. Double inversion recovery acquisition suppresses the white matter signal, which may enhance visualization of abnormal features at the gray-white matter interface. We assessed the ability of double inversion recovery to distinguish focal cortical dysplasia from periventricular nodular heterotopia and normal brain. Methods: Patients with focal cortical dysplasia were identified from our patient database, as was a control group comprising patients with periventricular nodular heterotopia and healthy persons. A senior neuroradiologist reviewed all clinical images and classified them as patients with focal cortical dysplasia (n = 16) or control subjects (periventricular nodular heterotopia, n = 13; normal, n = 20). Four neuroradiologists reviewed the de-identified and randomized double inversion recovery and magnetization prepared rapid acquired gradient echoes (MPRAGE) sequences for each person and scored them as normal, focal cortical dysplasia, or periventricular nodular heterotopia. Results: Among individual reviewers, double inversion recovery showed sensitivity from 50% to 88% and specificity from 67% to 91% in detecting focal cortical dysplasia. The sensitivity was notably higher in reviewers with more clinical experience with the technique. Consensus agreement among the three most experienced reviewers gave a sensitivity of 88% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72% to 97%) and specificity of 88% (95% CI, 62% to 98%) for double inversion recovery and sensitivity of 44% (95% CI, 20% to 70%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI, 89% to 100%) for MPRAGE. Conclusions: Double inversion recovery is sensitive for detection of focal cortical dysplasia with experienced users, particularly when there is consensus agreement. The use of two clinically available magnetic resonance imaging acquisitions-double inversion recovery and another sequence with high specificity such as MPRAGE-would be complementary in the evaluation of lesional epilepsy.

KW - DIR

KW - Focal cortical dysplasia

KW - Focal epilepsy

KW - MRI methods

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84969939694&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84969939694&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2016.04.013

DO - 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2016.04.013

M3 - Article

C2 - 27241231

AN - SCOPUS:84969939694

JO - Pediatric Neurology

JF - Pediatric Neurology

SN - 0887-8994

ER -