Dataset Information

Enhanced co-registration methods to improve intracranial electrode contact localization.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Electrode contact locations are important when planning tailored brain surgeries to identify pathological tissue targeted for resection and conversely avoid eloquent tissue. Current methods employ trained experts to use neuroimaging scans that are manually co-registered and localize contacts within ~2 mm. Yet, the state of the art is limited by either the expertise needed for each type of intracranial electrode or the inter-modality co-registration which increases error, reducing accuracy. Patients often have a variety of strips, grids and depths implanted; therefore, it is cumbersome and time-consuming to apply separate localization methods for each type of electrode, requiring expertise across different approaches.

New method

To overcome these limitations, a computational method was developed by separately registering an implant magnetic resonance image (MRI) and implant computed tomography image (CT) to the pre-implant MRI, then calculating an iterative closest point transformation using the contact locations extracted from the signal voids as ground truth.

Results

The implant MRI is robustly co-registered to the pre-implant MRI with a boundary-based registration algorithm. By extracting and utilizing 'signal voids' (the metal induced artifacts from the implant MRI) as electrode fiducials, the novel method is an all-in-one approach for all types of intracranial electrodes while eliminating inter-modality co-registration errors.

Comparison with existing methods

The distance between each electrode centroid and the brain's surface was measured, for the proposed method as well as the state of the art method using two available software packages, SPM 12 and FSL 4.1. The method presented here achieves the smallest distances to the brain's surface for all strip and grid type electrodes, i.e. contacts designed to rest directly on the brain surface.

Conclusion

We use one of the largest reported sample sizes in localization studies to validate this novel method for localizing different kinds of intracranial electrodes including grids, strips and depth electrodes.

SUBMITTER: Hinds WA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6095944 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundApproximately 2% of patients in primary care practice and up to 25% of hospital patients are registered as being allergic to an antibiotic. However, up to 90% of these registrations are incorrect, leading to unnecessary prescription of 2nd choice antibiotics with the attendant loss of efficacy, increased toxicity and antibiotic resistance. To improve registration, a better understanding is needed of how incorrect labels are attributed.ObjectiveTo investigate the quality of antibiotic allergy registration in primary care and identify determinants to improve registration of antibiotic allergies.DesignRegistration of antibiotic allergies in primary care practices were analysed for 1) completeness and 2) correctness. To identify determinants for improvement, semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers from four healthcare domains were conducted.ParticipantsA total of 300 antibiotic allergy registrations were analysed for completeness and correctness. Thirty-four healthcare providers were interviewed.Main measuresA registration was defined as complete when it included a description of all symptoms, time to onset of symptoms and the duration of symptoms. It was defined as correct when the conclusion was concordant with the Salden criteria. Determinants of correct antibiotic allergy registrations were divided into facilitators or obstructers.Key resultsRates of completeness and correctness of registrations were 0% and 29.3%, respectively. The main perceived barriers for correct antibiotic allergy registration were insufficient knowledge, lack of priority, limitations of registration features in electronic medical records (EMR), fear of medical liability and patients interpreting side-effects as allergies.ConclusionsThe quality of antibiotic allergy registrations can be improved. Potential interventions include raising awareness of the consequences of incomplete and the importance of correct registrations, by continued education, and above all simplifying registration in an EMR by adequate ICT support.