Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 279

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

FDG-PET improves surgical outcome in negative MRI Taylor-type focal cortical dysplasias

Chassoux, F., Rodrigo, S., Semah, F., Beuvon, F., Landre, E., Devaux, B., Turak, B., Mellerio, C., Meder, J.-F., Roux, F.-X., Daumas-Duport, C., Merlet, P., Dulac, O., Chiron, C.·2010·Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy and prognostic value of ¹⁸FDG-PET in a recent series of patients operated for intractable partial epilepsy associated with histologically proven Taylor-type focal cortical dysplasia (TTFCD) and negative MRI. METHODS: Of 23 consecutive patients (12 male, 7-38 years old) with negative 1.5-Tesla MRI, 10 exhibited subtle nonspecific abnormalities (e.g., unusual sulcus depth or gyral pattern) and the 13 others had strictly normal MRI. FDG-PET was analyzed both visually after coregistration on MRI and using SPM5 software. Metabolic data were compared with the epileptogenic zone (EZ) determined by stereo-EEG (SEEG) and surgical outcome. RESULTS: Visual PET analysis disclosed a focal or regional hypometabolism in 18 cases (78%) corresponding to a single gyrus (n = 9) or a larger cortical region (n = 9). PET/MRI coregistration detected a partially hypometabolic gyrus in 4 additional cases. SPM5 PET analysis (n = 18) was concordant with visual analysis in 13 cases. Location of PET abnormalities was extratemporal in all cases, involving eloquent cortex in 15 (65%). Correlations between SEEG, PET/MRI, and histologic findings (n = 20) demonstrated that single hypometabolic gyri (n = 11) corresponded to EZ and TTFCD, which was localized at the bottom of the sulcus. Larger hypometabolic areas (n = 9) also included the EZ and the dysplastic cortex but were more extensive. Following limited cortical resection (mean follow-up 4 years), seizure freedom without permanent motor deficit was obtained in 20/23 patients (87%). CONCLUSIONS: ¹⁸FDG-PET coregistered with MRI is highly sensitive to detect TTFCD and greatly improves diagnosis and surgical prognosis of patients with negative MRI.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1212/wnl.0b013e31820203a9

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 33 references

Cited by

See all 279

Metadata

Authors
Chassoux, F., Rodrigo, S., Semah, F., Beuvon, F., Landre, E., Devaux, B., Turak, B., Mellerio, C., Meder, J.-F., Roux, F.-X., Daumas-Duport, C., Merlet, P., Dulac, O., & Chiron, C.
Venue
Neurology
Published
2010-12-14
Volume
75
Issue
24
Pages
2168-2175
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W1991950182
Cited by
279
References
33
FWCI
9.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: FDG-PET improves surgical outcome in negative MRI Taylor-type focal cortical dysplasias. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.0b013e31820203a9
The paper
Chassoux, F., Rodrigo, S., Semah, F., Beuvon, F., Landre, E., Devaux, B., Turak, B., Mellerio, C., Meder, J.-F., Roux, F.-X., Daumas-Duport, C., Merlet, P., Dulac, O., & Chiron, C. (2010). FDG-PET improves surgical outcome in negative MRI Taylor-type focal cortical dysplasias. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e31820203a9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.