Person:
Aglio, Linda

Profile Picture

Email Address

AA Acceptance Date

Birth Date

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Job Title

Last Name

Aglio

First Name

Linda

Name

Aglio, Linda

Filters

2001 - 200912010 - 20171

Settings

Author's Publications: search.filters.isAuthorOfPublication.c11e05ae-7b30-48a0-8862-412ea75b65f4

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Transcranial magnetic stimulation coregistered with MRI: a comparison of a guided versus blind stimulation technique and its effect on evoked compound muscle action potentials
    (Elsevier BV, 2001) Gugino, Laverne; Rafael Romero, J; Aglio, Linda; Titone, Debra; Ramirez, Marcela; Pascual-Leone, Alvaro; Grimson, Eric; Weisenfeld, Neil; Kikinis, Ron; Shenton, Martha
    Introduction and methods: Compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) are characterized by enormous variability, even when attempts are made to stimulate the same scalp location. This report describes the results of a comparison of the spatial errors in coil placement and resulting CMAP characteristics using a guided and blind TMS stimulation technique. The former uses a coregistration system, which displays the intersection of the peak TMS induced electric field with the cortical surface. The latter consists of the conventional placement of the TMS coil on the optimal scalp position for activation of the first dorsal interossei (FDI) muscle. Results: Guided stimulation resulted in significantly improved spatial precision for exciting the corticospinal projection to the FDI compared to blind stimulation. This improved precision of coil placement was associated with a significantly increased probability of eliciting FDI responses. Although these responses tended to have larger amplitudes and areas, the coefficient of variation between guided and blind stimulation induced CMAPs did not significantly differ. Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrate that guided stimulation improves the ability to precisely revisit previously stimulated cortical loci as well as increasing the probability of eliciting TMS induced CMAPs. Response variability, however, is due to factors other than coil placement.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    The endoscopic endonasal approach is not superior to the microscopic transcranial approach for anterior skull base meningiomas—a meta-analysis
    (Springer Vienna, 2017) Muskens, Ivo S.; Briceno, Vanessa; Ouwehand, Tom L.; Castlen, Joseph P.; Gormley, William; Aglio, Linda; Zamanipoor Najafabadi, Amir H.; van Furth, Wouter R.; Smith, Timothy; Mekary, Rania; Broekman, Marike L. D.
    Object In the past decade, the endonasal transsphenoidal approach (eTSA) has become an alternative to the microsurgical transcranial approach (mTCA) for tuberculum sellae meningiomas (TSMs) and olfactory groove meningiomas (OGMs). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate which approach offered the best surgical outcomes. Methods: A systematic review of the literature from 2004 and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Pooled incidence was calculated for gross total resection (GTR), visual improvement, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, intraoperative arterial injury, and mortality, comparing eTSA and mTCA, with p-interaction values. Results: Of 1684 studies, 64 case series were included in the meta-analysis. Using the fixed-effects model, the GTR rate was significantly higher among mTCA patients for OGM (eTSA: 70.9% vs. mTCA: 88.5%, p-interaction < 0.01), but not significantly higher for TSM (eTSA: 83.0% vs. mTCA: 85.8%, p-interaction = 0.34). Despite considerable heterogeneity, visual improvement was higher for eTSA than mTCA for TSM (p-interaction < 0.01), but not for OGM (p-interaction = 0.33). CSF leak was significantly higher among eTSA patients for both OGM (eTSA: 25.1% vs. mTCA: 10.5%, p-interaction < 0.01) and TSM (eTSA: 19.3%, vs. mTCA: 5.81%, p-interaction < 0.01). Intraoperative arterial injury was higher among eTSA (4.89%) than mTCA patients (1.86%) for TSM (p-interaction = 0.03), but not for OGM resection (p-interaction = 0.10). Mortality was not significantly different between eTSA and mTCA patients for both TSM (p-interaction = 0.14) and OGM resection (p-interaction = 0.88). Random-effect models yielded similar results. Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, eTSA was not shown to be superior to mTCA for resection of both OGMs and TSMs. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00701-017-3390-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.