Literature DB >> 1793687

Source localization of EEG versus MEG: empirical comparison using visually evoked responses and theoretical considerations.

F H Lopes da Silva1, H J Wieringa, M J Peters.   

Abstract

Theoretically, the information we can obtain about the functional localization of a source of brain activity from the scalp, for instance evoked by a sensory stimulus, is the same whether one uses EEG or MEG recordings. However, the nature of the sources and, especially of the volume conductor, poses constraints such that appreciable differences between both types of data may exist. We present here empirical and theoretical data that illustrate which are the main constraints and to what extent they may affect electric potential and magnetic field maps. The empirical data consists of visual evoked potential and magnetic fields to the appearance of a checkerboard pattern (half-visual field stimulation). The concept of equivalent dipole is presented and its limitations are discussed. It is considered that the concept of equivalent dipole (ED) yields only an approximate description of the activity of a patch of cortex. A main difference between EEG and MEG recordings is the fact that radially oriented dipoles can hardly be seen in the MEG in contrast with the EEG. Accordingly, a weak tangential dipole component is difficult to distinguish in the EEG if a strong radial component is also present. However, a combination of both methods can give useful complementary information in such cases. A factor that influences largely such differences is the model of volume conductor used. A four concentric spheres model, as commonly used for solving the inverse problem of source localization, causes appreciable errors when EEG data are used but much less in case of the MEG. The use of a model consisting of eccentric spheres fitting the four compartments, brain, CSF, skull and scalp, provides a better approximation of the real geometry of the head and allows to obtain comparable results for visual evoked potentials and magnetic fields. It is emphasized that for precise localization of EDs, especially based on EEG recordings, a realistic model of the different compartments of the head is necessary. The latter must be tailor made to a given subject using MRI-scans, in view of the large variability in head geometry between subjects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1793687     DOI: 10.1007/bf01132770

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Topogr        ISSN: 0896-0267            Impact factor:   3.020


  12 in total

1.  Localization of brain sources of visually evoked responses: using single and multiple dipoles. An overview of different approaches.

Authors:  F H da Silva; H Spekreijse
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl       Date:  1991

2.  On the magnetic field distribution generated by a dipolar current source situated in a realistically shaped compartment model of the head.

Authors:  J W Meijs; F G Bosch; M J Peters; F H Lopes da Silva
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1987-03

3.  A comparative EEG/MEG equivalent dipole study of the pattern onset visual response.

Authors:  C J Stok; H J Spekreijse; M J Peters; H B Boom; F H Lopes da Silva
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl       Date:  1990

4.  Two bilateral sources of the late AEP as identified by a spatio-temporal dipole model.

Authors:  M Scherg; D Von Cramon
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1985-01

5.  The influence of model parameters on EEG/MEG single dipole source estimation.

Authors:  C J Stok
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 4.538

6.  The variability of the human striate cortex.

Authors:  G S Brindley
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1972-09       Impact factor: 5.182

7.  Principal components analysis for source localization of VEPs in man.

Authors:  J Maier; G Dagnelie; H Spekreijse; B W van Dijk
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Mathematical dipoles are adequate to describe realistic generators of human brain activity.

Authors:  J C de Munck; B W van Dijk; H Spekreijse
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 4.538

9.  The (+) reference: accuracy of estimated mean components in average response studies.

Authors:  H Schimmel
Journal:  Science       Date:  1967-07-07       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  MEG versus EEG localization test using implanted sources in the human brain.

Authors:  D Cohen; B N Cuffin; K Yunokuchi; R Maniewski; C Purcell; G R Cosgrove; J Ives; J G Kennedy; D L Schomer
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 10.422

View more
  11 in total

1.  Mapping the signal-to-noise-ratios of cortical sources in magnetoencephalography and electroencephalography.

Authors:  Daniel M Goldenholz; Seppo P Ahlfors; Matti S Hämäläinen; Dahlia Sharon; Mamiko Ishitobi; Lucia M Vaina; Steven M Stufflebeam
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 2.  An experimental model of progressive epilepsy: the development of kindling of the hippocampus of the rat.

Authors:  F H Lopes da Silva; W Kamphuis; M Titulaer; M Vreugdenhil; W J Wadman
Journal:  Ital J Neurol Sci       Date:  1995 Feb-Mar

3.  Comparison of realistically shaped boundary-element and spherical head models in source localization of early somatosensory evoked potentials.

Authors:  H Buchner; T D Waberski; M Fuchs; H A Wischmann; M Wagner; R Drenckhahn
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 3.020

4.  Learning in brain-computer interface control evidenced by joint decomposition of brain and behavior.

Authors:  Jennifer Stiso; Marie-Constance Corsi; Jean M Vettel; Javier Garcia; Fabio Pasqualetti; Fabrizio De Vico Fallani; Timothy H Lucas; Danielle S Bassett
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 5.379

5.  Pain catastrophizing and cortical responses in amputees with varying levels of phantom limb pain: a high-density EEG brain-mapping study.

Authors:  Lene Vase; Line Lindhardt Egsgaard; Lone Nikolajsen; Peter Svensson; Troels Staehelin Jensen; Lars Arendt-Nielsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Cortical responses to the mirror box illusion: a high-resolution EEG study.

Authors:  Line Lindhardt Egsgaard; Laura Petrini; Giselle Christoffersen; Lars Arendt-Nielsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-10-25       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Source analysis of median nerve and finger stimulated somatosensory evoked potentials: multichannel simultaneous recording of electric and magnetic fields combined with 3D-MR tomography.

Authors:  H Buchner; M Fuchs; H A Wischmann; O Dössel; I Ludwig; A Knepper; P Berg
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.020

8.  Short-term cortical plasticity induced by conditioning pain modulation.

Authors:  Line Lindhardt Egsgaard; Line Buchgreitz; Li Wang; Lars Bendtsen; Rigmor Jensen; Lars Arendt-Nielsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Origin of P16 median nerve SEP component identified by dipole source analysis--subthalamic or within the thalamo-cortical radiation?

Authors:  H Buchner; T D Waberski; M Fuchs; H A Wischmann; R Beckmann; A Rienäcker
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Combining EEG and MEG for the reconstruction of epileptic activity using a calibrated realistic volume conductor model.

Authors:  Ümit Aydin; Johannes Vorwerk; Philipp Küpper; Marcel Heers; Harald Kugel; Andreas Galka; Laith Hamid; Jörg Wellmer; Christoph Kellinghaus; Stefan Rampp; Carsten Hermann Wolters
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.