• Anthony J Tyndall, Julia Reinhardt, Volker Tronnier, Luigi Mariani, and Christoph Stippich.
• Division of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
• Eur Radiol. 2017 Jan 1; 27 (1): 267-278.

ObjectivesTo analyse the long-term feasibility and limitations of presurgical fMRI in a cohort of tumour and epilepsy patients with different MR-scanners at 1.5 and 3.0 T.MethodsFour hundred and ninety-one consecutive patients undergoing presurgical fMRI between 2000 and 2012 on five different MR-scanners using established paradigms and semi-automated data processing were included. Success rates of task performance and BOLD-activation were determined for motor and somatosensory somatotopic mapping and language localisation. Procedural success, failures and imaging artifacts were analysed. MR-field strengths were compared.ResultsTwo thousand three hundred fifteen of 2348 (98.6 %) attempted paradigms (1033 motor, 1220 speech, 95 somatosensory) were successfully performed. 100 paradigms (4.3 %) were repetition runs. 23 speech, 6 motor and 2 sensory paradigms failed for non-compliance and technical issues. Most language paradigm failures were noted in overt sentence generation. Average significant BOLD-activation was higher for motor than language paradigms (95.8 vs. 81.6 %). Most language paradigms showed significantly higher activation rates at 3 T compared to 1.5 T, whereas no significant difference was found for motor paradigms.ConclusionsfMRI proved very robust for the presurgical localisation of the different motor and somatosensory body representations, as well as Broca's and Wernicke's language areas across different MR-scanners at 1.5 and 3.0 T over 13 years.Key Points• Standardised presurgical motor and language fMRI is robust across various MRI platforms. • Motor fMRI is less dependent on field strength than language fMRI. • fMRI task failures are relatively low and are reduced by paradigm repetition.

33 keywords...

hide…