Functional MRI Task Comparison for Language Mapping in Neurosurgical Patients. Issue 3 (16th January 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Unadkat, Prashin; Fumagalli, Luca; Rigolo, Laura; Vangel, Mark G.; Young, Geoffrey S.; Huang, Raymond; Mukundan, Srinivasan; Golby, Alexandra; Tie, Yanmei
• Is Part Of: Journal of neuroimaging. Volume 29:Issue 3(2019)
• Page Start: 348
• Page End: 356
• Publication Date: 2019-01-16
• Subjects: BOLD fMRI -- brain lesions -- brain tumors -- language mapping -- presurgical planning; Diagnostic imaging -- Periodicals; Nervous system -- Diseases -- Diagnosis -- Periodicals; Imagerie pour le diagnostic -- Périodiques; Système nerveux -- Maladies -- Diagnostic -- Périodiques; Imagerie médicale; Neuroimagerie; Neurologie; Système nerveux; Périodique électronique (Descripteur de forme); Ressource Internet (Descripteur de forme); 616.804754
• DOI: 10.1111/jon.12597
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1051-2284

Abstract

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Language task‐based functional MRI (fMRI) is increasingly used for presurgical planning in patients with brain lesions. Different paradigms elicit activations of different components of the language network. The aim of this study is to optimize fMRI clinical usage by comparing the effectiveness of three language tasks for language lateralization and localization in a large group of patients with brain lesions. METHODS: We analyzed fMRI data from a sequential retrospective cohort of 51 patients with brain lesions who underwent presurgical fMRI language mapping. We compared the effectiveness of three language tasks (Antonym Generation, Sentence Completion (SC), and Auditory Naming) for lateralizing language function and for activating cortex within patient‐specific regions‐of‐interest representing eloquent language areas, and assessed the degree of spatial overlap of the areas of activation elicited by each task. RESULTS: The tasks were similarly effective for lateralizing language within the anterior language areas. The SC task produced higher laterality indices within the posterior language areas and had a significantly higher agreement with the clinical report. Dice coefficients between the task pairs were in the range of .351‐.458, confirming substantial variation in the components of the language network activated by each task. CONCLUSIONS: SC task consistently produced large activations within the dominant hemisphere and was more effective for lateralizing language within the posterior language areas. The low degree of spatial overlap among the tasks strongly supports the practice of using a battery of tasks to help the surgeon to avoid eloquent language areas.