Presurgical navigated transcranial magnetic brain stimulation for recurrent gliomas in motor eloquent areas
Highlights
► Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) and intraoperative direct cortical stimulation (DCS) results correlate well. ► Recurrent tumor does not affect nTMS accuracy despite scarring, plasticity, and edema. ► fMRI results were significantly different, but independent of recurrent tumor or control group.
Introduction
Resection of gliomas in eloquent motor areas remains a surgical challenge and can only be safely achieved with the aid of intraoperative neuromonitoring. While continuous transcranial, cortical motor evoked potentials (MEP) monitoring and subcortical electrical stimulation are well-established techniques to monitor functional integrity of the motor strip and corticospinal tract, a reliable method that functionally identifies motor cortex prior to surgery is not currently in use. Modalities for non-invasive preoperative brain mapping, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) are unable to adequately identify motor functional areas because metabolic and electrical activity do not necessarily correlate with neurophysiological pathways. Therefore, its usefulness for functional motor cortex mapping is limited (Rutten and Ramsey, 2010).
Several studies have shown that navigated transcranial magnetic brain stimulation (nTMS) correlates well with intraoperative direct cortical stimulation (DCS) and is a useful tool for surgical planning (Forster et al., 2011, Krieg et al., 2012a, Krieg et al., 2012c, Picht et al., 2009, Picht et al., 2011a). However, it has only been assessed in newly diagnosed tumors. Scar formation and commonly suggested cerebral plasticity in recurrent tumors could potentially impair nTMS applicability (Ius et al., 2011, Robles et al., 2008). Therefore, this study aimed to prospectively evaluate nTMS accuracy in recurrent gliomas with relation to the established mapping methods of intraoperative DCS and preoperative fMRI. We also compared nTMS accuracy in recurrent gliomas and newly diagnosed brain tumors, which served as a control group.
Section snippets
Patients
We performed presurgical nTMS mapping in 8 patients prior to recurrent glioma resection and in 23 patients who underwent resection of newly diagnosed tumors (control group) between May 2010 and September 2011. All tumors were located in or near the precentral gyrus or the CST (Fig. 1). Demographic data and the clinical neurological status of every patient was assessed and documented. Tumor location was determined from imaging data, and tumor histology was acquired.
Magnetic resonance imaging
Pre- and postoperative MRI
Patients
For recurrent gliomas, the mean age was 50.1 ± 11.1 years (median 45.2 years; range 40.5–69.1 years); 5 patients (62.5%) were female and 3 (37.5%) were male. All patients were right-handed and had a history of seizures, and 6 of the 8 (75.0%) were on antiepileptic drugs (AED). Mild preoperative motor deficits were present in 2 cases (25.0%), and two tumors (25.0%) were in the dominant hemisphere. Out of 8 cases, there were 6 glioblastomas (WHO°IV), 1 anaplastic astrocytoma (WHO°III), and 1 diffuse
Discussion
The present study aimed to assess the feasibility and accuracy of nTMS in patients with recurrent gliomas near or in motor eloquent areas. Therefore, motor areas outlined during preoperative non-invasive nTMS were compared to intraoperative DCS. Spatial errors for recurrent gliomas were compared to a series of newly diagnosed gliomas, in which the same comparison between presurgical nTMS and DCS was performed. The central finding of the present study is that nTMS in patients with recurrent
Disclosure
The study was completely financed by institutional grants through the Department of Neurosurgery. SK has been involved in Nexstim Oy workshops but is not a contracted consultant. Therefore, the authors report no conflict of interest concerning the materials or methods used in this study, or the findings specified in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Ms. Maria Becker for performing the highly demanding imaging studies in addition to her other duties.
References (33)
- et al.
Neurophysiological monitoring during astrocytoma surgery
Neurosurg Clin N Am
(1990) - et al.
Strategies for brain shift evaluation
Med Image Anal
(2004) - et al.
Effect of brain tumor neovasculature defined by rCBV on BOLD fMRI activation volume in the primary motor cortex
Neuroimage
(2006) - et al.
Evidence for potentials and limitations of brain plasticity using an atlas of functional resectability of WHO grade II gliomas: towards a “minimal common brain”
Neuroimage
(2011) - et al.
Second surgery for glioblastoma A 4-year retrospective study conducted in both the Montpellier and Nice Departments of Neurosurgery A literature review [Article in French]
Neurochirurgie
(2010) - et al.
Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation
Neurophysiol Clin
(2010) - et al.
Combined use of non-invasive techniques for improved functional localization for a selected group of epilepsy surgery candidates
Neuroimage
(2009) - et al.
Somatosensory evoked potential phase reversal and direct motor cortex stimulation during surgery in and around the central region
Neurosurgery
(1996) New concepts in surgery of WHO grade II gliomas: functional brain mapping, connectionism and plasticity – a review
J Neurooncol
(2006)- et al.
Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation and functional magnetic resonance imaging: advanced adjuncts in preoperative planning for central region tumors
Neurosurgery
(2011)
Intra-operative mapping of the motor cortex during surgery in and around the motor cortex
Acta Neurochir (Wien)
Diffusion tensor imaging fiber tracking using navigated brain stimulation – a feasibility study
Acta Neurochir (Wien)
Functional guidance in intracranial tumor surgery
Perspect Med
Utility of presurgical navigated transcranial magnetic brain stimulation for the resection of tumors in eloquent motor areas
J Neurosurg
Predictive value and safety of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring with motor evoked potentials in glioma surgery
Neurosurgery
Functional magnetic resonance imaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation: complementary approaches in the evaluation of cortical motor function
Neurology
Cited by (55)
Cortical stimulation depth of nTMS investigated in a cohort of convexity meningiomas above the primary motor cortex
2024, Journal of Neuroscience MethodsFunctional Mapping for Glioma Surgery, Part 1: Preoperative Mapping Tools
2021, Neurosurgery Clinics of North AmericaCitation Excerpt :For motor function, the accuracy and predictive values of fMRI seem different and better suited to sufficiently predict the location of motor function compared with DCS.22–24 Yet, other studies still proved a large deviance between fMRI and DCS.25–27 In recent years, resting-state fMRI was introduced as a promising method to reduce noise and bias due to impaired tumor-induced oxygenation.28
Paired-pulse navigated TMS is more effective than single-pulse navigated TMS for mapping upper extremity muscles in brain tumor patients
2020, Clinical NeurophysiologyCitation Excerpt :Motor mapping by nTMS and nTMS-based DTI FT of the CST is routinely used in the preoperative setup in specialized neurosurgical centers (Conti et al., 2014, Frey et al., 2012, Krieg et al., 2012a, Krieg et al., 2012b, Krieg et al., 2013b, Picht et al., 2011, Sollmann et al., 2017b, Tarapore et al., 2012). Correspondence between nTMS motor maps and intraoperative DES is high in patients with motor-eloquent brain tumors, making nTMS a reliable and accurate technique with limited failure rates (Krieg et al., 2012b, Krieg et al., 2013b, Picht et al., 2011, Tarapore et al., 2012). However, lesions can have severe negative impact on CSE and the patients’ motor function since a variety of factors very frequently present in patients with brain tumors, such as peritumoral edema, lesion spread into the motor cortex, or antiepileptic drug intake, can take relevant effect (Sollmann et al., 2017a, Sollmann et al., 2017c).
Application of presurgical navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation motor mapping for adjuvant radiotherapy planning in patients with high-grade gliomas
2019, Radiotherapy and OncologyCitation Excerpt :; Nexstim Plc., Helsinki, Finland). For neuronavigation during motor mapping, co-registration of the patient’s head and the respective MRI sequence was performed based on anatomical landmarks, using an integrated infrared device in combination with a headband with reflective sphere markers [16,17,22]. Pregelled surface electrodes (Neuroline 720; Ambu, Bad Nauheim, Germany) were attached to upper and lower extremity muscles to record motor evoked potentials (MEPs) during stimulation.