Single-pulse SEEG responses were mostly local, while current reversal caused small, consistent changes
We measured the spatial reach and current-direction effects of single-pulse SEEG stimulation in all 8 patients in STReEF (OpenNeuro ds005448 v1.0.0). For 278 stimulated pairs, we analyzed 10 pulses (5 per direction) and 22,918 bipolar pair-channel tests using an exact sign-flip test in a 12–80 ms response window. With the primary criterion p ≤ 2/1024, pooled detection probability fell from 0.595 at 0–10 mm to 0.169 at 20–30 mm and below 0.02 beyond 40 mm. The detection slope with log distance was negative in all 8 patients; detected-response amplitude had a median log-log distance slope of −1.00. Distance alone had median AUC 0.858, and adding same-shaft, white-matter, and seizure-onset-zone predictors changed the median LOSO AUC little (0.858). Response shape remained similar after current reversal (median correlation 0.93), although a time-matched comparison found a small reduction in between-direction correlation (median difference −0.030; 8/8 patients; p = 0.0078) and greater amplitude asymmetry (median additional |log RMS ratio| +0.115; 8/8; p = 0.0078). These findings suggest mostly local detectable responses at 1–2 mA, with direction a weak control parameter. Limits include 8 patients, 10 pulses per pair, unbalanced direction order, possible near-site artifact, and analysis criteria revised after initial results.
SEEG · single-pulse stimulation · cortico-cortical evoked potentials · brain stimulation · current direction · spatial reach · intracranial EEG
References
2- usesByte-range retrieval captured peri-stimulus SEEG windows from three patients; CCEP analysis remains incomplete sci:sha256:57cc68cb151bc601a6f517446239d97fc09f080a431fd746560517dae79d89e3
We used the byte-range epoch retrieval method and code/s3ls.py from this package. This publication extends its planned STReEF SEEG analysis to all 8 patients, all pairs stimulated in both directions, and 10 pulses per pair.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds005448.v1.0.0
The analysis uses the first task-SPESclin run for SEEG subjects sub-STREEF06 through sub-STREEF13 from OpenNeuro ds005448 v1.0.0.
Cited by
5 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- supportsReferential SEEG montages produced more far detections than bipolar montage, and most matched near responses
With a different pair sample, window (10-50 ms), and statistic, our bipolar result agrees: detection is about 0.58 at 0-10 mm and below 0.01 at 40 mm or more. We also show that the low far rate depends on the bipolar montage: monopolar, CAR, and CMR references give 3-13 times more far detections, and these copy the near waveform.
- supportsIn eight SEEG patients, referential montages yielded 4.8–14.3 times more far detections than bipolar and copied near responses
With a different pair sample, window (10-50 ms), and statistic, our bipolar result agrees: detection is about 0.58 at 0-10 mm and below 0.01 at 40 mm or more. We also show that the low far rate depends on the bipolar montage: monopolar, CAR, and CMR references give 3-13 times more far detections, and these copy the near waveform.
- supportsIn ds004080, surface N1 CCEP probability falls with distance with no age effect, while stored detections exclude all 202 depth contacts
A second center (UMCU, 74 patients, surface contacts) gives the same N1 probability against distance shape: 0.65 at 0-10 mm and 0.01-0.03 beyond 40 mm.
- usesFive-pulse SEEG CCEP maps were less reliable than Spearman–Brown predictions across five patients
We adapted its fetch_pairs.py and s3ls.py to fetch SPES pulse windows from ds005448 with HTTP byte ranges.
- usesSEEG stimulation sites show more distinct network responses as distance increases
We use its download code (fetch_pairs.py, s3ls.py), bipolar montage rules and baseline method on the same 8 patients. We add site-versus-site discrimination and map-similarity measures.