Predictors of frame-based SEEG electrode implantation accuracy

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Thanomporn Wittayacharoenpong , Matthew Gutman , Martin Hunn , Jacob Bunyamin , Zhibin Chen , Simon Vogrin , Wendyl D’Souza , Amy Halliday , Kristian Bulluss , Udaya Seneviratne , Cecilia Harb , Paul Beech , Matt Hudson , Haris Hakeem , Terence J. O’Brien , Patrick Kwan , Joshua Laing , Andrew Neal
{"title":"Predictors of frame-based SEEG electrode implantation accuracy","authors":"Thanomporn Wittayacharoenpong ,&nbsp;Matthew Gutman ,&nbsp;Martin Hunn ,&nbsp;Jacob Bunyamin ,&nbsp;Zhibin Chen ,&nbsp;Simon Vogrin ,&nbsp;Wendyl D’Souza ,&nbsp;Amy Halliday ,&nbsp;Kristian Bulluss ,&nbsp;Udaya Seneviratne ,&nbsp;Cecilia Harb ,&nbsp;Paul Beech ,&nbsp;Matt Hudson ,&nbsp;Haris Hakeem ,&nbsp;Terence J. O’Brien ,&nbsp;Patrick Kwan ,&nbsp;Joshua Laing ,&nbsp;Andrew Neal","doi":"10.1016/j.jocn.2025.111430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Factors affecting electrode accuracy in stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG) implantation have been inconsistently reported. In the setting of a recent expansion in stereotactic implantation techniques, we examined pre- and post-implantation variables influencing electrode accuracy, as well as factors contributing to unsuccessful sampling intended sub-lobar target from traditional frame-based method in order to provide a comprehensive reference for future implantation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We analyzed consecutive patients who underwent frame-based SEEG implantations at two Australian centers. Pre-implantation MRI was co-registered with post-implantation CT to obtain planned and actual trajectories (PT/AT). Absolute target error (Euclidean distance), radial error (perpendicular to PT), and depth error (parallel to PT) were calculated between AT and PT. Pre- and post-implantation factors, including electrode trajectory and anatomical factors, were collected. AT were classified as <em>off-target</em> if they did not sample the intended cortical target/s. Multivariate generalized linear mixed model assessed factors associated with bone entry and radial errors. Binomial regression was employed to examine predictive factors for <em>off-target</em> electrodes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We collected data from 629 electrodes across 50 patients (12.58 ± 2.50 electrodes/patient). Median absolute, radial, depth errors, and bone entry point localization error (BEPLE) were 1.85 [IQR1.23–2.58], 1.56 [IQR0.95–2.26], 0.57 [IQR0.23–1.07] and 1.09[IQR0.74–1.45] mm, respectively. Fifty-four (8.59 %) electrodes were <em>off-target</em> and 19.89 %(41/207) of electrodes with radial error exceeded the 2 mm safety margin and were off-target. Of the pre-implantation factors, trajectory angle on the coronal plane (p = 0.01), bone thickness (p &lt; 0.001), and implantation depth (p = 0.001) predicted radial errors. BEPLE, p &lt; 0.001), bone thickness (p &lt; 0.001) and implantation depth (p = 0.001) were significant post-implantation predictive factors. <em>Off-target</em> trajectories were associated with bone thickness (p &lt; 0.001) and trajectory angle (p = 0.01) for pre-implantation and radial error (p &lt; 0.001) for post-implantation variables.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This study analyzed predictive factors of electrode accuracy using a traditional frame-based technique to provide a comprehensive reference. Electrode target radial error is strongly predicted by increased implantation depth, bone thickness along the trajectory, and electrode angle at bone entry. Increased radial error is strongly associated with electrodes missing the intended sub-lobar target. Further research is required to investigate the full clinical implications of electrode inaccuracy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15487,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"139 ","pages":"Article 111430"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967586825004035","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Factors affecting electrode accuracy in stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG) implantation have been inconsistently reported. In the setting of a recent expansion in stereotactic implantation techniques, we examined pre- and post-implantation variables influencing electrode accuracy, as well as factors contributing to unsuccessful sampling intended sub-lobar target from traditional frame-based method in order to provide a comprehensive reference for future implantation.

Methods

We analyzed consecutive patients who underwent frame-based SEEG implantations at two Australian centers. Pre-implantation MRI was co-registered with post-implantation CT to obtain planned and actual trajectories (PT/AT). Absolute target error (Euclidean distance), radial error (perpendicular to PT), and depth error (parallel to PT) were calculated between AT and PT. Pre- and post-implantation factors, including electrode trajectory and anatomical factors, were collected. AT were classified as off-target if they did not sample the intended cortical target/s. Multivariate generalized linear mixed model assessed factors associated with bone entry and radial errors. Binomial regression was employed to examine predictive factors for off-target electrodes.

Results

We collected data from 629 electrodes across 50 patients (12.58 ± 2.50 electrodes/patient). Median absolute, radial, depth errors, and bone entry point localization error (BEPLE) were 1.85 [IQR1.23–2.58], 1.56 [IQR0.95–2.26], 0.57 [IQR0.23–1.07] and 1.09[IQR0.74–1.45] mm, respectively. Fifty-four (8.59 %) electrodes were off-target and 19.89 %(41/207) of electrodes with radial error exceeded the 2 mm safety margin and were off-target. Of the pre-implantation factors, trajectory angle on the coronal plane (p = 0.01), bone thickness (p < 0.001), and implantation depth (p = 0.001) predicted radial errors. BEPLE, p < 0.001), bone thickness (p < 0.001) and implantation depth (p = 0.001) were significant post-implantation predictive factors. Off-target trajectories were associated with bone thickness (p < 0.001) and trajectory angle (p = 0.01) for pre-implantation and radial error (p < 0.001) for post-implantation variables.

Conclusions

This study analyzed predictive factors of electrode accuracy using a traditional frame-based technique to provide a comprehensive reference. Electrode target radial error is strongly predicted by increased implantation depth, bone thickness along the trajectory, and electrode angle at bone entry. Increased radial error is strongly associated with electrodes missing the intended sub-lobar target. Further research is required to investigate the full clinical implications of electrode inaccuracy.
基于框架的SEEG电极植入精度预测因子
背景:影响立体脑电图(SEEG)植入中电极准确性的因素报道不一致。在最近立体定向植入技术的发展背景下,我们研究了影响电极植入前和植入后的变量,以及导致传统基于框架的方法无法成功采样预期亚叶目标的因素,以便为未来的植入提供全面的参考。方法我们分析了在澳大利亚两家中心连续接受基于框架的SEEG植入的患者。植入前MRI与植入后CT共同登记,以获得计划和实际轨迹(PT/AT)。计算AT和PT之间的绝对靶误差(欧氏距离)、径向误差(垂直于PT)和深度误差(平行于PT),收集电极轨迹和解剖因素等植入前后因素。如果AT没有取样到预期的皮层靶标,则被归类为脱靶。多元广义线性混合模型评估与骨进入和径向误差相关的因素。采用二项回归分析脱靶电极的预测因素。结果我们收集了50例患者629个电极的数据(12.58±2.50个电极/例)。中位绝对误差、径向误差、深度误差和骨入口点定位误差(BEPLE)分别为1.85 [IQR1.23-2.58]、1.56 [IQR0.95-2.26]、0.57 [IQR0.23-1.07]和1.09[IQR0.74-1.45] mm。54个(8.59%)电极脱靶,19.89%(41/207)电极径向误差超过2 mm安全范围脱靶。种植前因素中,冠状面轨迹角度(p = 0.01)、骨厚度(p <;0.001),植入深度(p = 0.001)预测径向误差。p &;0.001),骨厚度(p <;0.001)和种植深度(p = 0.001)是种植后显著的预测因素。脱靶轨迹与骨厚度相关(p <;0.001)、轨迹角(p = 0.01)和径向误差(p <;0.001)为植入后变量。结论本研究利用传统的基于框架的技术分析了电极精度的预测因素,提供了全面的参考。电极靶径向误差可以通过增加植入深度、骨沿轨迹厚度和电极入骨角度来预测。增加的径向误差与电极错过预期的亚叶目标密切相关。需要进一步的研究来调查电极不准确的全部临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
402
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: This International journal, Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, publishes articles on clinical neurosurgery and neurology and the related neurosciences such as neuro-pathology, neuro-radiology, neuro-ophthalmology and neuro-physiology. The journal has a broad International perspective, and emphasises the advances occurring in Asia, the Pacific Rim region, Europe and North America. The Journal acts as a focus for publication of major clinical and laboratory research, as well as publishing solicited manuscripts on specific subjects from experts, case reports and other information of interest to clinicians working in the clinical neurosciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信