Posterior Quadrantic Epilepsy Surgery: Technical Variants, Surgical Anatomy, and Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patients with intractable epilepsy due to extensive lesions involving the posterior quadrant (temporal, parietal, and occipital lobes) form a small subset of epilepsy surgery. This study was done with a view to analyze our experience with this group of patients and to define the changes in the surgical technique over the last 15 years. We also describe the microsurgical technique of the different surgical variants used, along with their functional neuroanatomy. METHODS: In this series there were 13 patients with a median age of 17 years. All patients had extensive presurgical evaluation that provided concordant evidence localizing the lesion and seizure focus to the posterior quadrant. The objective of the surgery was to eliminate the effect of the epileptogenic tissue and preserve motor and sensory functions. RESULTS: During the course of this study period of 15 years, the surgical procedure performed evolved toward incorporating more techniques of disconnection and minimizing resection. Three technical variants were thus utilized in this series, namely, (i) anatomical posterior quadrantectomy (APQ), (ii) functional posterior quadrantectomy (FPQ), and (iii) periinsular posterior quadrantectomy (PIPQ). After a median follow-up period of 6 years, 12/13 patients had Engel's Class I seizure outcome. CONCLUSION: The results of surgery for posterior quadrantic epilepsy have yielded excellent seizure outcomes in 92% of the patients in the series with no mortality or major morbidity. The incorporation of disconnective techniques in multilobar surgery has maintained the excellent results obtained earlier with resective surgery.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".