METHODS: A survey was developed by multicenter consensus. The survey captured institutional characteristics, geographic distributions, intracranial EEG utilization, and barriers to SEEG. Respondents were representative epilepsy centers across the region.
RESULTS: Four epilepsy centers with established intracranial/ SEEG and two centers from a country without any access to SEEG participated. The responses identified that 1. Access to SEEG remained highly restricted across the region with an estimated one capable epilepsy center per 100 million people; 2. The region includes over half a billion people living in countries with no access to SEEG; 3. Staffing/ financial constraints were universal factors that limited growth of services or development of new services; 4. SEEG numbers have plateaued as a result of these challenges.
CONCLUSION: The study puts into real numbers the challenges faced by the region in accessing SEEG. SEEG remains highly underutilized and future approaches should focus on regional training and referral pathways.
METHODS: Both ictal and interictal ESI were performed by the use of patient-specific realistic forward models and 3 different linear distributed inverse models. Lateralization as well as concordance between ESI-estimated focuses and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) focuses were assessed.
RESULTS: All the ESI focuses (both ictal and interictal) were found lateralized to the same hemisphere as ictal SPECT focuses. Lateralization results also were in agreement with the lesion sides as visualized on magnetic resonance imaging. Ictal ESI results, obtained from the best-performing inverse model, were fully concordant with the same cortical lobe as SPECT focuses, whereas the corresponding concordance rate is 87.50% in case of interictal ESI.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that ictal ESI gives fully lateralized and highly concordant results with ictal SPECT and may provide a cost-effective substitute for ictal SPECT.