Traditionally, epilepsy was studied under a zone-oriented approach, which isolated the importance of particular areas, essentially the seizure onset zone, as the unique cause of seizures. Very recently, a true network approach that emphasizes the importance of interactions between cortical areas has been favored over the classical zone-oriented perspective13-17,28. However, the current body of evidence for epilepsy as a network disease is still highly fragmented, and more research is needed. The present work aims to reanalyze data provided by traditional methods as the FOE, under the complex network approach. The protocol presented here describes a step by step methodological procedure to perform a complex network and spectral analysis of semi-invasive recordings in TLE patients.
The application of the technique described above has demonstrated the usefulness of the network approach as compared with the more traditional localized or zone-oriented perspectives. In recent works17,29 it was shown that, using the very same procedure as the one described here, an imbalance in the mesial connectivity in refractory TLE patients is apparent. Mesial connectivity is reduced in the ipsilateral side both during the interictal29 and ictal17,29 stages. This result could not be anticipated by looking solely at the areas where the epileptogenic activity arises. This somehow surprising result was also described by using network theories on fMRI signals30,31. Moreover, the application of the combined technique of FOE+network theory has shown the equivalence of mesial activity during seizures and under the effects of a promoter of epileptogenic activity, as it is the pharmacological administration of etomidate32.
The technique described here is capable of detecting mesial network imbalance in short interictal recordings lasting at most one or two hours29. In this way, a drastic reduction in the analysis time and patient hospital stay could be achieved. In addition, from a therapeutic perspective, the existing imbalance in TLE patients could be "resolved" by using chronically implanted (by neurosurgeons) devices, as much as the way it is done in deep brain stimulation.
To obtain optimal results using the information provided in this protocol, some issues should be considered in advance. First, the implantation of the electrodes should be performed by an experienced neurosurgeon because their incorrect placement could produce severe neurological consequences and misleading recordings. Furthermore, the selection of appropriate epochs for further analysis relies entirely on the neurophysiologist's interpretation of the raw EEG; therefore, experience in clinical EEG analysis is mandatory. The data format of the exported files from the electroencephalograph depends on the particular brand; consequently, good programming skills are needed to adapt the scripts to different data formats. Finally, to ensure the reliability of the data, quality controls should be applied to the results. Overestimation and false positives are likely to appear when working with a high number of correlations. In such cases, statistical methods to improve sensitivity should be used. In this regard, it is important to establish a threshold in the correlations to discard values that are not representative of a true underlying synchronization. Thus, in this protocol, an edge between nodes i and j will be only considered to exist if the absolute value of the correlation between these nodes is greater than 0.5, a criterion previously employed17,26. Other thresholds in the range of 0.2 to 0.8 should be employed to verify similar results and to ensure a smooth transition from one threshold to the following threshold. In addition to thresholds, other methodologies may be used to obtain reliable results, such as Bonferroni correction or surrogate data testing. Moreover, when working with EEG data, it is important to keep in mind that brain networks are complex systems with non-linear dynamics; therefore, in addition to the linear correlation, other non-linear synchronization measures should be used to ensure the quality of the results, such as mutual information or phase synchronization33.
Calculating connectivity directly from scalp electrodes, as it is partially done in this work, entails some risks. The main problem rest in the contamination effect due to volume conduction, always present with scalp recording. One way to overcome this issue is by working on the sources space, an appealing alternative employed by many researches. Another approach demands the use of measures of synchronization which minimizes the contamination of amplitude effects. By using the phase synchronization (also known as Phase Locking Value) we minimize the effect of volume conduction, as it was demonstrated in several works34.
As in other invasive neurophysiological techniques, recordings from FOE cannot be obtained from control subjects, a fact that severely limits the use of certain research protocols. Data from FOE recordings provide valuable information about mesial temporal lobe activity17,29,35, especially during lateralization to the epileptogenic side in TLE patients33. Compared with invasive techniques, the FOE technique is non-traumatic for the brain and involves relatively simple manipulation, and its recordings are of high quality over long periods of time11. Compared to MRI, FOE recordings provide better time resolution of electrocortical activity. In addition, many possibilities exist to explore measures other than those used in this work. These facts also increase the possibility of analyzing several biomedical recordings simultaneously. These advantages of FOE recordings combined with complex network and spectral analysis make this technique a powerful tool for epilepsy research with potential applications in clinical practice.