RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 High-Field 7T MRI in a drug-resistant paediatric epilepsy cohort: image comparison and radiological outcomes
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.08.19.24312117
DO 10.1101/2024.08.19.24312117
A1 Vecchiato, Katy
A1 Casella, Chiara
A1 Dokumaci, Ayse Sila
A1 Carney, Olivia
A1 Cleary, Jon O.
A1 Ciò, Pierluigi Di
A1 Cleri, Michela
A1 Colford, Kathleen
A1 Piper, Rory J.
A1 Arichi, Tomoki
A1 Eyre, Michael
A1 Aitken, Fraser
A1 Tomi-Tricot, Raphael
A1 Wilkinson, Tom
A1 McGinnity, Colm J
A1 Yaakub, Siti N
A1 Giles, Sharon L.
A1 Malik, Shaihan
A1 Hammers, Alexander
A1 Bridgen, Philippa
A1 Carmichael, David W.
A1 O’Muircheartaigh, Jonathan
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/23/2024.08.19.24312117.abstract
AB Background and Objectives Epileptogenic lesions in focal epilepsy can be subtle or undetected on conventional brain MRI. Ultra-high field (7T) MRI offers higher spatial resolution, contrast and signal-to-noise ratio compared to conventional imaging systems and has shown promise in the presurgical evaluation of adult focal epilepsy. However, the utility of ultra-high field MRI in paediatric focal epilepsy, where malformations of cortical development are more common, is unclear. This study compared 7T to conventional 3T MRI in children with epilepsy by comparing: (i) scan tolerability; (ii) radiological image quality; (iii) lesion yield.Materials and Methods Children with drug-resistant focal epilepsy and healthy controls were recruited prospectively and imaged at both 3T and 7T. Safety and tolerability during scanning was assessed via a questionnaire. Image quality was evaluated by an expert paediatric neuroradiologist and estimated quantitatively by comparing cortical thickness between field strengths. To assess lesion detection yield of 7T MRI, a multi-disciplinary team jointly reviewed patients’ images.Results 41 patients (8-17 years, mean=12.6 years, 22 male) and 22 healthy controls (8-17 years, mean=11.7 years, 15 male) were recruited. All children completed the scan, with no significant adverse events. Higher discomfort due to dizziness was reported at 7T (p=0.02), with side-effects more frequently noted in younger children (p=0.02). However, both field strengths were generally well-tolerated and side-effects were transient. 7T images had increased inhomogeneity and artefacts compared to those obtained at 3T. Cortical thickness measurements were significantly thinner at 7T (p<0.001). 8/26 (31%) patients had new lesions identified at 7T which were not identified at 3T, influencing the surgical management in 4/26 (15%).Discussion 7T MRI in children with epilepsy is feasible, well-tolerated and is associated with a 31% improvement in lesion detection rates.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis research was supported by GOSHCC Sparks Grant V4419, King's Health Partners, in part by the Medical Research Council (UK) (grants MR/ K006355/1 and MR/LO11530/1) and Medical Research Council Centre for Neurodevelopmental Disorders, King's College London (MR/N026063/1), and by core funding from the Wellcome EPSRC Centre for Medical Engineering at King's College London [WT203148/Z/16/Z]. J.O.M, K.V, and C.C were funded by a Sir Henry Dale Fellowship jointly by the Wellcome Trust and the Royal Society (206675/Z/17/Z). C.C was also funded by a grant from GOSHCC (VC1421). T.A. was also supported by an MRC Transition Support Award [MR/V036874/1] and Senior Clinical Fellowship [MR/Y009665/1]. M.E was funded by Action Medical Research (GN2835) and the British Paediatric Neurology Association. R.J.P was funded by a Surgeon-Scientist grant by GOSCHCC (VS0221). This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the Wellcome Trust [WT203148/Z/16/Z and 206675/Z/17/Z] and by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London and/or the NIHR Clinical Research Facility. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval was granted by the UK Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales (ethics ref. 18/LO/1766).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe clinical and neuroimaging data used in the current work are available from the senior author (J.O.M.) on formal request indicating name and affiliation of the researcher as well as a brief description of the intended use for the data. All requests will undergo King's College London-regulated procedure, thus requiring submission of a Material Transfer Agreement. Full preprocessing steps and the code to run the HCP preprocessing pipeline can be found at https://github.com/Washington-University/HCPpipelines. Please also see https://github.com/Washington-University/workbench for the source code for Connectome Workbench. Other code excerpts, information regarding the analysis, or intermediary results can be made available upon request to chiara.casella{at}kcl.ac.uk.