Variability of Intraoperative Electrostimulation Parameters in Conscious Individuals: Language Fasciculi.

OBJECTIVE: The authors analyzed the current-intensity thresholds for electrostimulation of language fasciculi and the possible consequences of threshold variability on brain mapping. METHODS: A prospective protocol of subcortical electrostimulation was used in 50 patients undergoing brain mapping, directly stimulating presumed language fasciculi identified by diffusion tensor imaging. RESULTS: The stimulation-intensity thresholds for identification of language fasciculi varied among patients (mean minimum current intensity of 4.4 mA, range = 1.5-10 mA, standard deviation = 1.1 mA), and 23% of fascicular interferences were detected only above 5 mA. Repeated stimulation of the same site with the same intensity led to different types of interferences in 20% of patients, and a higher current intensity led to changes in the type of response in 27%. The mean minimum stimulation intensities did not differ significantly between different fasciculi, between the different types of interference obtained, or with age, sex, or type of tumor. Positive results on cortical mapping were significantly associated with positive results on subcortical mapping (P < 0.001). Subcortical intensity thresholds were slightly lower than cortical ones (mean = 4.43 vs. 5.25 mA, P = 0.034). In 23 of 50 subcortical mappings, fascicular stimulation produced no language interference. CONCLUSIONS: Individual variability of minimum stimulation-intensity thresholds for identification of language fasciculi is frequent. Nevertheless, even when a high current intensity was used, many stimulations on language fasciculi remained negative for various hypothetic reasons. Finding the optimal current intensity for identifying language fasciculi is of paramount importance to refine the clinical results and scientific data derived from brain mapping.

One-Step Customized PEEK Cranioplasty After 3D Printed Resection Template Assisted Surgery for a Frontal Intraosseous Meningioma: A Case Report.

AIM: To present one-step customized cranioplasty for intraosseous meningiomas. CASE DESCRIPTION: The authors report the case of a 54-year-old woman with a consequent frontal intraosseous meningioma invading the superior sagittal sinus. The patient only suffered from local pain and cosmetic damage. A complete resection was scheduled with a one-step reconstruction of the frontal bone by a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) specific implant. This implant was computer-assisted designed and manufactured and verified by the surgeon before the intervention. During surgery, the resection was guided by a computer designed resection template and by the classic neuronavigation system. Cranioplasty has been considered optimal intraoperatively by surgeons. The patient, a few weeks after surgery, underwent a subcutaneous fluid collection, rapidly resolutive with a circumferential pressure bandage. Six months after surgery, the patient considered the surgery a success with a very good cosmetic result and a total regression of her local pain. CONCLUSION: One-step computer-assisted cranioplasty is a safe and effective procedure for large skull defects. PEEK specific implant for cranioplasty offer advantages compared to other materials that will be discussed under the scope of the one-step reconstruction.

Intraoperative electrostimulation for awake brain mapping: how many positive interference responses are required for reliability?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize the reproducibility of language trials within and between brain mapping sessions. METHODS: Brain mapping and baseline testing data from 200 adult patients who underwent resection of left-hemisphere tumors were evaluated. Data from 11 additional patients who underwent a second resection for recurrence were analyzed separately to investigate reproducibility over time. In all cases, a specific protocol of electrostimulation brain mapping with a controlled naming task was used to detect language areas, and the results were statistically compared with preoperative and intraoperative baseline naming error rates. All patients had normal preoperative error rates, controlled for educational level and age (mean 8.92%, range 0%-16.25%). Intraoperative baseline error rates within the normal range were highly correlated with preoperative ones (r = 0.74, p < 10-10), although intraoperative rates were usually higher (mean 13.30%, range 0%-26.67%). Initially, 3 electrostimulation trials were performed in each cortical area. If 2 of 3 trials showed language interference, 1 or 2 additional trials were performed (depending on results). RESULTS: In the main group of 200 patients, there were 82 single interferences (i.e., positive results in 1 of 3 trials), 227 double interferences (2/3), and 312 full interferences (3/3). Binomial statistics revealed that full interferences were statistically significant (vs intraoperative baseline) in 92.7% of patients, while double interferences were significant only in 38.5% of patients, those with the lowest error rates. On further testing, one-third of the 2/3 trials became 2/4 trials, which was significant in only one-quarter of patients. Double interference could be considered significant for most patients (> 90%) when confirmed by 2 subsequent positive trials (4/5). In the 11 patients who were operated on twice, only 26% of areas that tested positive in the initial operation tested positive in the second and showed the same type of interference and the same current threshold (i.e., met all 3 criteria). CONCLUSIONS: Electrostimulation trials in awake brain mapping produced graded patterns of positive reproducibility levels, and their significance varied with the baseline error rates. The results suggest that caution is warranted when 2 of 3 trials are positive, although the need for additional trials depends on the individual patients' baseline error rates. Reproducibility issues should be considered in the interpretation of data from awake brain mapping.