Electroencephalography is mandatory to determine the epilepsy syndrome. However, for the precise localization of the irritative zone in patients with focal epilepsy, costly and sometimes cumbersome imaging techniques are used. Recent small studies using electric source imaging suggest that electroencephalography itself could be used to localize the focus. However, a large prospective validation study is missing. This study presents a cohort of 152 operated patients where electric source imaging was applied as part of the pre-surgical work-up allowing a comparison with the results from other methods. Patients (n = 152) with >1 year postoperative follow-up were studied prospectively. The sensitivity and specificity of each imaging method was defined by comparing the localization of the source maximum with the resected zone and surgical outcome. Electric source imaging had a sensitivity of 84% and a specificity of 88% if the electroencephalogram was recorded with a large number of electrodes (128–256 channels) and the individual magnetic resonance image was used as head model. These values compared favourably with those of structural magnetic resonance imaging (76% sensitivity, 53% specificity), positron emission tomography (69% sensitivity, 44% specificity) and ictal/interictal single-photon emission-computed tomography (58% sensitivity, 47% specificity). The sensitivity and specificity of electric source imaging decreased to 57% and 59%, respectively, with low number of electrodes (<32 channels) and a template head model. This study demonstrated the validity and clinical utility of electric source imaging in a large prospective study. Given the low cost and high flexibility of electroencephalographic systems even with high channel counts, we conclude that electric source imaging is a highly valuable tool in pre-surgical epilepsy evaluation.

Stroke lesions induce not only loss of local neural function, but disruptions in spatially distributed areas. However, it is unknown whether they affect the synchrony of electrical oscillations in neural networks and if changes in network coherence are associated with neurological deficits. This study assessed these questions in a population of patients with subacute, unilateral, ischemic stroke.Spontaneous cortical oscillations were reconstructed from high-resolution electroencephalograms (EEG) with adaptive spatial filters. Maps of functional connectivity (FC) between brain areas were created and correlated with patient performance in motor and cognitive scores.In comparison to age-matched healthy controls, stroke patients showed a selective disruption of FC in the alpha frequency range. The spatial distribution of alpha band FC reflected the pattern of motor and cognitive deficits of the individual patient: network nodes that participate normally in the affected functions showed local decreases in FC with the rest of the brain. Interregional FC in the alpha band, but not in delta, theta, or beta frequencies, was highly correlated with motor and cognitive performance. In contrast, FC between contralesional areas and the rest of the brain was negatively associated with patient performance.Alpha oscillation synchrony at rest is a unique and specific marker of network function and linearly associated with behavioral performance. Maps of alpha synchrony computed from a single restingstate EEG recording provide a robust and convenient window into the functionality and organization of cortical networks with numerous potential applications.

PURPOSE: Patients with magnetic resonance (MR)-negative focal epilepsy (MRN-E) have less favorable surgical outcomes (between 40% and 70%) compared to those in whom an MRI lesion guides the site of surgical intervention (60-90%). Patients with extratemporal MRN-E have the worst outcome (around 50% chance of seizure freedom). We studied whether electroencephalography (EEG) source imaging (ESI) of interictal epileptic activity can contribute to the identification of the epileptic focus in patients with normal MRI. METHODS: We carried out ESI in 10 operated patients with nonlesional MRI and a postsurgical follow-up of at least 1 year. Five of the 10 patients had extratemporal lobe epilepsy. Evaluation comprised surface and intracranial EEG monitoring of ictal and interictal events, structural MRI, [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), ictal and interictal perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) scans. Eight of the 10 patients also underwent intracranial monitoring. RESULTS: ESI correctly localized the epileptic focus within the resection margins in 8 of 10 patients, 9 of whom experienced favorable postsurgical outcomes. DISCUSSION: The results highlight the diagnostic value of ESI and encourage broadening its application to patients with MRN-E. If the surface EEG contains fairly localized spikes, ESI contributes to the presurgical decision process

This finding highlights the added value of HD-ESI in the presurgical workup, in particular in combination with an informative MRI.

Background and purpose: The spectrum of COVID-19, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (SARS-CoV-2), includes different neurologic manifestations of the central and peripheral nervous system. Methods: From March through April 2020, in two university hospitals located in western Switzerland, we examined three patients with Guillain-Barr e syndrome (GBS) following SARS-CoV-2. Results: These cases were characterized by a primary demyelinating electrophysiological pattern (Acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy or AIDP) and a less severe disease course compared to recently published case series. Clinical improvement was observed in all patients at week five. One patient was discharged from hospital after full recovery with persistence of minor neurological signs (areflexia). Two of the three patients remained hospitalized: one was able to walk and the other could stand up with assistance. Conclusions: We report three cases of typical GBS (AIDP) occurring after SARS-CoV-2 infection and presenting with a favourable clinical course. Given the interval between COVID-19-related symptoms and neurological manifestations (mean of 15 days) we postulate a secondary immune-mediated mechanism rather than direct viral damage.