Parahippocampal epilepsy with subtle dysplasia: A cause of “imaging negative” partial epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Lesion-negative refractory partial epilepsy is a major challenge in the assessment of patients for potential surgery. Finding a potential epileptogenic lesion simplifies assessment and is associated with good outcome. Here we describe imaging features of subtle parahippocampal dysplasia in five cases that were initially assessed as having imaging-negative frontal or temporal lobe epilepsy. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical and imaging features of five patients with seizures from the parahippocampal region. RESULTS: Five patients had subtle but distinctive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) abnormalities in the parahippocampal gyrus. This was a unilateral signal abnormality in the parahippocampal white matter extending into gray matter on heavily T(1)- and T(2)-weighted images with relative preservation of the gray-white matter boundary on T(1)-weighted volume sequences. Only one of these patients had typical electroclinical unilateral temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE); one mimicked frontal lobe epilepsy, two showed bitemporal seizures, and one had unlocalized partial seizures. All have had surgery; four are seizure-free (one has occasional auras only, follow-up 6 months to 10 years), and one has a >50% seizure reduction. Histopathologic evaluation suggested dysplastic features in the surgical specimens in all. DISCUSSION: In patients with lesion-negative partial epilepsy with frontal or temporal semiology, or in cases with apparent bitemporal seizures, subtle parahippocampal abnormalities should be carefully excluded. Recognizing the MRI findings of an abnormal parahippocampal gyrus can lead to successful surgery without invasive monitoring, despite apparently incongruent electroclinical features.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".