Skip to main content
. 2009 Jan 26;30(9):2986–2996. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20723

Table I.

Overview of the fMRI results obtained with the two processing methods

Patient Epilepsy type Number of spikes during EEG‐fMRI Conventional EEG‐fMRI EEG‐fMRI based on ICA General comment Agreement between Conventional and ICA based EEG‐fMRI
Position (mm) Volume (mm3) Max Z‐score Position (mm) Volume (mm3) Max Z‐score
1 Multiple tubersclerosis complex, two large calcified hamartomas (right frontal lobe, left operculum) 63 (−28,4,4) 3984 4.2 (−22,−25,−53) 44,120 5.04 Positive, located interior to the left hamartoma yes
(1,−60,38) 25,880 4.98 Negative no
2 Multifocal cryptogenic epilepsy without focal lesion 27 (47,24,−5) 2192 4.58 (47,17,−3) 12,784 5.83 positive yes
3 Frontal lobe epilepsy 127 (−62,−46,9) 5,200 3.43 (−62,−42,7) 8,328 4.23 positive ipsolateral yes
(55,−56,19) 5,584 3.52 (55,−60,−19) 8,680 3.93 positive contralateral yes
4 Cortical dysplasia, right hemisphere parietal and central 20 (23,−79,43) 14,768 5.16 (18,−60,21) 80,304 8.14 Positive, right parietal yes
cortical 7.4 cortical too spread 12.5 negative yes
5 Cryptogenic focal epilepsy, ictal SPECT shows left frontal lobe hiper‐perfusion 19 (−54,−1,11) 9,528 5.11 (−62,−3,12) 4,856 5.9 positive ipsilateral (left) yes
(58,4,12) 10,896 5.21 (60,2,11) 9,120 5.94 positive contralateral (right) yes
(4,−69,8) 24,000 4.09 (0,−60,7) 14,560 4.81 positive occipital yes
6 Parieto‐occipital epilepsy 148 (3,−55,31) 25,088 4.28 Positive no
7 Right mesial sclerosis 256 (37,0,−13) 14,296 4.98 (36,−1,−17) 16,736 5.27 Positive yes
(6,19,−5) 19,712 4.17 positive (ICA1) no
8 Left mesial sclerosis 14 (−32,−3,−29) 7,376 4.59 positive ipsilateral (right) no
(−10,−83,19) 20,728 5.08 positive occipital no
9 Left mesial sclerosis 105 (30,34,19) 8,488 3.63 positive (right spikes) no
(52,−13,34) 7,240 3.52 positive (right spikes) no

Positions are given in mm in MNI space, and correspond to the center of the activated region. Where columns are left blank, no activation was found. The column “General comment” indicates whether the activation is positively or negatively correlated with the neural activity and whether, if positive, it refers to activity in the region with expected lateralization or elsewhere. Agreement was considered positive when significant overlap between the patches of activation was observed