We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Refractory epilepsy: comparison of MR imaging, CT, and histopathologic findings in 117 patients.
Radiology 1996 October
PURPOSE: We compared computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for the detection of abnormalities underlying epilepsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT and MR imaging findings in 117 patients (56 female, 61 male patients; age at surgery, 12-56 years) who underwent surgery for medically refractory epilepsy were compared with histopathologic findings by using the McNemar and chi 2 statistics.
RESULTS: Sensitivities for detecting abnormalities were 95% (104 of 109) for MR imaging and 32% (35 of 109) for CT; specificities were 87% (13 of 15) for MR imaging and 93% (14 of 15) for CT (P < .001 for MR versus histopathologic findings). In the subgroup of 113 patients with solitary findings, MR imaging depicted an abnormality at the surgical site in 86% (n = 97) of 113 patients compared to 28% (n = 32) for CT (P < .001). In this same subgroup, histopathologic findings were predicted by using MR imaging in 88% (n = 99) of 113 patients versus 35% (n = 40) with CT (P < .001). Multiple findings were observed in 3% of CT (three of 117) and 17% of MR (20 of 117) images.
CONCLUSION: CT has no role in the diagnostic evaluation of medically refractory epilepsy. Even in patients with medically controlled epilepsy, use of less costly CT instead of MR imaging seems imprudent.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT and MR imaging findings in 117 patients (56 female, 61 male patients; age at surgery, 12-56 years) who underwent surgery for medically refractory epilepsy were compared with histopathologic findings by using the McNemar and chi 2 statistics.
RESULTS: Sensitivities for detecting abnormalities were 95% (104 of 109) for MR imaging and 32% (35 of 109) for CT; specificities were 87% (13 of 15) for MR imaging and 93% (14 of 15) for CT (P < .001 for MR versus histopathologic findings). In the subgroup of 113 patients with solitary findings, MR imaging depicted an abnormality at the surgical site in 86% (n = 97) of 113 patients compared to 28% (n = 32) for CT (P < .001). In this same subgroup, histopathologic findings were predicted by using MR imaging in 88% (n = 99) of 113 patients versus 35% (n = 40) with CT (P < .001). Multiple findings were observed in 3% of CT (three of 117) and 17% of MR (20 of 117) images.
CONCLUSION: CT has no role in the diagnostic evaluation of medically refractory epilepsy. Even in patients with medically controlled epilepsy, use of less costly CT instead of MR imaging seems imprudent.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app