Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society · 2024
In Search of a Common Language: The Standardized Electrode Nomenclature for Stereoelectroencephalography Applications.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chiu Michelle Y, Bolton Jeffrey, Raskin Jeffrey S, Curry Daniel J, Weiner Howard L, Pearl Phillip L, Stone Scellig
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) is widely performed on individuals with medically refractory epilepsy for whom invasive seizure localization is desired. Despite increasing adoption in many centers across the world, no standardized electrode naming convention exists, generating confusion among both clinical and research teams.
METHODS: We have developed a novel nomenclature, named the Standardized Electrode Nomenclature for SEEG Applications system. Concise, unique, informative, and unambiguous labels provide information about entry point, deep targets, and relationships between electrodes. Inter-rater agreement was evaluated by comparing original electrode names from 10 randomly sampled cases (including 136 electrodes) with those prospectively assigned by four additional blinded raters.
RESULTS: The Standardized Electrode Nomenclature for SEEG Application system was prospectively implemented in 40 consecutive patients undergoing SEEG monitoring at our institution, creating unique electrode names in all cases, and facilitating implantation design, SEEG recording and mapping interpretation, and treatment planning among neurosurgeons, neurologists, and neurophysiologists. The inter-rater percent agreement for electrode names among two neurosurgeons, two epilepsy neurologists, and one neurosurgical fellow was 97.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: This standardized naming convention, Standardized Electrode Nomenclature for SEEG Application, provides a simple, concise, reproducible, and informative method for specifying the target(s) and relative position of each SEEG electrode in each patient, allowing for successful sharing of information in both the clinical and research settings. General adoption of this nomenclature could pave the way for improved communication and collaboration between institutions.
METHODS: We have developed a novel nomenclature, named the Standardized Electrode Nomenclature for SEEG Applications system. Concise, unique, informative, and unambiguous labels provide information about entry point, deep targets, and relationships between electrodes. Inter-rater agreement was evaluated by comparing original electrode names from 10 randomly sampled cases (including 136 electrodes) with those prospectively assigned by four additional blinded raters.
RESULTS: The Standardized Electrode Nomenclature for SEEG Application system was prospectively implemented in 40 consecutive patients undergoing SEEG monitoring at our institution, creating unique electrode names in all cases, and facilitating implantation design, SEEG recording and mapping interpretation, and treatment planning among neurosurgeons, neurologists, and neurophysiologists. The inter-rater percent agreement for electrode names among two neurosurgeons, two epilepsy neurologists, and one neurosurgical fellow was 97.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: This standardized naming convention, Standardized Electrode Nomenclature for SEEG Application, provides a simple, concise, reproducible, and informative method for specifying the target(s) and relative position of each SEEG electrode in each patient, allowing for successful sharing of information in both the clinical and research settings. General adoption of this nomenclature could pave the way for improved communication and collaboration between institutions.