Literature DB >> 15248545

Effect of skull resistivity on the spatial resolutions of EEG and MEG.

Jaakko A Malmivuo1, Veikko E Suihko.   

Abstract

The resistivity values of the different tissues of the head affect the lead fields of electroencephalography (EEG). When the head is modeled with a concentric spherical model, the different resistivity values have no effect on the lead fields of the magnetoencephalography (MEG). Recent publications indicate that the resistivity of the skull is much lower than what was estimated by Rush and Driscoll. At the moment, this information on skull resistivity is, however, slightly controversial. We have compared the spatial resolution of EEG and MEG for cortical sources by calculating the half-sensitivity volumes (HSVs) of EEG and MEG as a function of electrode and magnetometer distance, respectively, with the relative skull resistivity as a parameter. Because the spatial resolution is related to the HSV, these data give an overview of the effect of these parameters on the spatial resolution of both techniques. Our calculations show that, with the new information on the resistivity of the skull, in the spherical model for cortical sources the spatial resolution of the EEG is better than that of the MEG.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15248545     DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2004.827255

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng        ISSN: 0018-9294            Impact factor:   4.538


  8 in total

1.  Modeling skull electrical properties.

Authors:  R J Sadleir; A Argibay
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2007-07-14       Impact factor: 3.934

2.  New method for analysing sensitivity distributions of electroencephalography measurements.

Authors:  Juho Väisänen; Outi Väisänen; Jaakko Malmivuo; Jari Hyttinen
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 2.602

3.  Cortical Spreading Depolarization (CSD) Recorded from Intact Skin, from Surface of Dura Mater or Cortex: Comparison with Intracortical Recordings in the Neocortex of Adult Rats.

Authors:  A Lehmenkühler; F Richter
Journal:  Neurochem Res       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 3.996

4.  Corticolimbic mechanisms in the control of trial and error learning.

Authors:  Phan Luu; Matthew Shane; Nikki L Pratt; Don M Tucker
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2008-10-14       Impact factor: 3.252

5.  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

6.  Integrating dense array EEG in the presurgical evaluation of temporal lobe epilepsy.

Authors:  Madoka Yamazaki; Marie Terrill; Ayataka Fujimoto; Takamichi Yamamoto; Don M Tucker
Journal:  ISRN Neurol       Date:  2012-11-14

Review 7.  Advances in Magnetoresistive Biosensors.

Authors:  Diqing Su; Kai Wu; Renata Saha; Chaoyi Peng; Jian-Ping Wang
Journal:  Micromachines (Basel)       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 2.891

8.  Fast periodic visual stimulation to highlight the relationship between human intracerebral recordings and scalp electroencephalography.

Authors:  Corentin Jacques; Jacques Jonas; Louis Maillard; Sophie Colnat-Coulbois; Bruno Rossion; Laurent Koessler
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 5.038

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.