Source localization of epileptic spikes using Multiple Sparse Priors. Issue 2 (February 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fernandez-Corazza, Mariano; Feng, Rui; Ma, Chengxin; Hu, Jie; Pan, Li; Luu, Phan; Tucker, Don
• Is Part Of: Clinical neurophysiology. Volume 132:Issue 2(2021)
• Page Start: 586
• Page End: 597
• Publication Date: 2021-02
• Subjects: Electroencephalography (EEG) -- Epilepsy -- Source localization -- Bayesian -- Multiple sparse priors -- sLORETA; Neurophysiology -- Periodicals; Electroencephalography -- Periodicals; Electromyography -- Periodicals; Neurology -- Periodicals; 612.8
• DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2020.10.030
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1388-2457

Abstract

Highlights: Bayesian multiple sparse priors (MSP) inverse method accurately localizes epilepsy foci. MSP solutions are more focal and easier to use than sLORETA inverse method. MSP inverse method showed similar or better accuracy than coherent maximum entropy on the mean inverse method and is faster to compute. Abstract: Objective: To evaluate epileptic source estimation using multiple sparse priors (MSP) inverse method and high-resolution, individual electrical head models. Methods: Accurate source localization is dependent on accurate electrical head models and appropriate inverse solvers. Using high-resolution, individual electrical head models in fifteen epilepsy patients, with surgical resection and clinical outcome as criteria for accuracy, performance of MSP method was compared against standardized low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA) and coherent maximum entropy on the mean (cMEM) methods. Results: The MSP method performed similarly to the sLORETA method and slightly better than the cMEM method in terms of success rate. The MSP and cMEM methods were more focal than sLORETA with the advantage of not requiring an arbitrary selection of a hyperparameter or thresholding of reconstructed current density values to determine focus. MSP and cMEM methods were better than sLORETA in terms of spatial dispersion. Conclusions: Results suggest that the three methods are complementary and could be used together. In practice, the MSP method will be easier to use and interpret compared to sLORETA, and slightly more accurate and faster than the cMEM method. Significance: Source localization of interictal spikes from dense-array electroencephalography data has been shown to be a reliable marker of epileptic foci and useful for pre-surgical planning. The advantages of MSP make it a useful complement to other inverse solvers in clinical practice.