Search

Highlights • Resection of HGM language sites is associated with worse neuropsychological outcomes. • Working memory was significantly worse in patients with resection of HGM naming sites. • Neuropsychological evaluation of children with epilepsy should include multiple cognitive and language domains. Abstract Background Language mapping with high-gamma modulation (HGM) has compared well with electrical cortical stimulation mapping (ESM). However, there is limited prospective data about its functional validity. We compared changes in neuropsychological evaluation (NPE) performed before and 1-year after epilepsy surgery, between patients with/without resection of cortical sites showing HGM during a visual naming task. Methods Pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) patients underwent pre-surgical language localization with ESM and HGM using a visual naming task. Surgical decisions were based solely on ESM results. NPE difference scores were compared between patients with/without resection of HGM naming sites using principal component (PC) analysis. Follow-up NPE scores were modeled with resection group as main effect and respective pre-surgical score as a covariate, using analysis of covariance. Results Seventeen native English speakers (12 females), aged 6.5–20.2 years, were included. One year after epilepsy surgery, first PC score increased by (mean ± standard deviation) 14.4 ± 16.5 points in patients without resection, whereas it decreased by 7.6 ± 24.6 points in those with resection of HGM naming sites (p = 0.040). This PC score represented verbal comprehension, working memory, perceptual reasoning (Wechsler subscales); Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement; and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. Subsequent analysis showed significant difference in working memory score between patients with/without resection of HGM naming sites (−15.2 points, 95% confidence limits −29.7 to −0.7, p = 0.041). Conclusion We highlight the functional consequences of resecting HGM language sites, and suggest that NPE of DRE patients should include comprehensive assessment of multiple linguistic and cognitive domains besides naming ability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]