Literature DB >> 15070197

Sensitivity of EEG and MEG measurements to tissue conductivity.

Nevzat G Gençer1, Can E Acar.   

Abstract

Monitoring the electrical activity inside the human brain using electrical and magnetic field measurements requires a mathematical head model. Using this model the potential distribution in the head and magnetic fields outside the head are computed for a given source distribution. This is called the forward problem of the electro-magnetic source imaging. Accurate representation of the source distribution requires a realistic geometry and an accurate conductivity model. Deviation from the actual head is one of the reasons for the localization errors. In this study, the mathematical basis for the sensitivity of voltage and magnetic field measurements to perturbations from the actual conductivity model is investigated. Two mathematical expressions are derived relating the changes in the potentials and magnetic fields to conductivity perturbations. These equations show that measurements change due to secondary sources at the perturbation points. A finite element method (FEM) based formulation is developed for computing the sensitivity of measurements to tissue conductivities efficiently. The sensitivity matrices are calculated for both a concentric spheres model of the head and a realistic head model. The rows of the sensitivity matrix show that the sensitivity of a voltage measurement is greater to conductivity perturbations on the brain tissue in the vicinity of the dipole, the skull and the scalp beneath the electrodes. The sensitivity values for perturbations in the skull and brain conductivity are comparable and they are, in general, greater than the sensitivity for the scalp conductivity. The effects of the perturbations on the skull are more pronounced for shallow dipoles, whereas, for deep dipoles, the measurements are more sensitive to the conductivity of the brain tissue near the dipole. The magnetic measurements are found to be more sensitive to perturbations near the dipole location. The sensitivity to perturbations in the brain tissue is much greater when the primary source is tangential and it decreases as the dipole depth increases. The resultant linear system of equations can be used to update the initially assumed conductivity distribution for the head. They may be further exploited to image the conductivity distribution of the head from EEG and/or MEG measurements. This may be a fast and promising new imaging modality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15070197     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/49/5/004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  34 in total

1.  Neuroelectromagnetic forward head modeling toolbox.

Authors:  Zeynep Akalin Acar; Scott Makeig
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2010-05-08       Impact factor: 2.390

2.  Modeling of the human skull in EEG source analysis.

Authors:  Moritz Dannhauer; Benjamin Lanfer; Carsten H Wolters; Thomas R Knösche
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Sensitivity of beamformer source analysis to deficiencies in forward modeling.

Authors:  Olaf Steinsträter; Stephanie Sillekens; Markus Junghoefer; Martin Burger; Carsten H Wolters
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2010-05-24       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  From evoked potentials to cortical currents: Resolving V1 and V2 components using retinotopy constrained source estimation without fMRI.

Authors:  Samuel A Inverso; Xin-Lin Goh; Linda Henriksson; Simo Vanni; Andrew C James
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-02-12       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  High-resolution EEG source imaging of one-year-old children.

Authors:  Zeynep Akalin Acar; Silvia Ortiz-Mantilla; April Benasich; Scott Makeig
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2016-08

6.  A novel integrated MEG and EEG analysis method for dipolar sources.

Authors:  Ming-Xiong Huang; Tao Song; Donald J Hagler; Igor Podgorny; Veikko Jousmaki; Li Cui; Kathleen Gaa; Deborah L Harrington; Anders M Dale; Roland R Lee; Jeff Elman; Eric Halgren
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2007-06-14       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Parallel implementation of the accelerated BEM approach for EMSI of the human brain.

Authors:  Y Ataseven; Z Akalin-Acar; C E Acar; N G Gençer
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2008-02-26       Impact factor: 2.602

8.  Source estimates for MEG/EEG visual evoked responses constrained by multiple, retinotopically-mapped stimulus locations.

Authors:  Donald J Hagler; Eric Halgren; Antigona Martinez; Mingxiong Huang; Steven A Hillyard; Anders M Dale
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 5.038

9.  Influence of white matter anisotropic conductivity on EEG source localization: comparison to fMRI in human primary visual cortex.

Authors:  Won Hee Lee; Zhongming Liu; Bryon A Mueller; Kelvin Lim; Bin He
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 3.708

10.  EEG/MEG source imaging: methods, challenges, and open issues.

Authors:  Katrina Wendel; Outi Väisänen; Jaakko Malmivuo; Nevzat G Gencer; Bart Vanrumste; Piotr Durka; Ratko Magjarević; Selma Supek; Mihail Lucian Pascu; Hugues Fontenelle; Rolando Grave de Peralta Menendez
Journal:  Comput Intell Neurosci       Date:  2009-07-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.