Epilepsia · 1996
Postictal language dysfunction in patients with right or bilateral hemispheric language localization.
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.
Privitera M, Kohler C, Cahill W, Yeh H S
Аннотация
PURPOSE: As shown previously, when temporal lobe complex partial seizures (TLCPS) originate from the language dominant hemisphere, patients cannot read a test phrase correctly within 60 s of the end of the ictal discharge. We wished to assess whether postictal language testing results discordant with this pattern identified patients with non-left (right hemisphere or mixed) language dominance.
METHODS: Since 1988, all patients undergoing video/EEG monitoring at our institution have been given a test phrase to read aloud as soon as a seizure is detected. Inclusion criteria for this study were (a) postictal language testing within 60 s of seizure end for at least one TLCPS, (b) > 90% seizure reduction after anterior temporal lobectomy with 2-year minimum follow-up, and (c) language localization by either intracarotid amobarbital test (IAT) or direct electrical stimulation of left hemisphere cortex.
RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four seizures in 64 patients were analyzed. Discordant postictal language patterns were noted in 10 of 11 patients with IAT documented non-left language dominance and in 15 of 53 with left dominance (p = 0.006; sensitivity 90.9%, specificity 71.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Postictal language testing accurately identifies patients with non-left language dominance and may be useful in selecting appropriate patients for IAT.
METHODS: Since 1988, all patients undergoing video/EEG monitoring at our institution have been given a test phrase to read aloud as soon as a seizure is detected. Inclusion criteria for this study were (a) postictal language testing within 60 s of seizure end for at least one TLCPS, (b) > 90% seizure reduction after anterior temporal lobectomy with 2-year minimum follow-up, and (c) language localization by either intracarotid amobarbital test (IAT) or direct electrical stimulation of left hemisphere cortex.
RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four seizures in 64 patients were analyzed. Discordant postictal language patterns were noted in 10 of 11 patients with IAT documented non-left language dominance and in 15 of 53 with left dominance (p = 0.006; sensitivity 90.9%, specificity 71.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Postictal language testing accurately identifies patients with non-left language dominance and may be useful in selecting appropriate patients for IAT.