Literature DB >> 22878608

Signal distortion from microelectrodes in clinical EEG acquisition systems.

William C Stacey1, Spencer Kellis, Paras R Patel, Bradley Greger, Christopher R Butson.   

Abstract

Many centers are now using high-density microelectrodes during traditional intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) both for research and clinical purposes. These microelectrodes are FDA-approved and integrate into clinical EEG acquisition systems. However, the electrical characteristics of these electrodes are poorly described and clinical systems were not designed to use them; thus, it is possible that this shift into clinical practice could have unintended consequences. In this study, we characterized the impedance of over 100 commercial macro- and microelectrodes using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) to determine how electrode properties could affect signal acquisition and interpretation. The EIS data were combined with the published specifications of several commercial EEG systems to design digital filters that mimic the behavior of the electrodes and amplifiers. These filters were used to analyze simulated brain signals that contain a mixture of characteristic features commonly observed in iEEG. Each output was then processed with several common quantitative EEG measurements. Our results show that traditional macroelectrodes had low impedances and produced negligible distortion of the original signal. Brain tissue and electrical wiring also had negligible filtering effects. However, microelectrode impedances were much higher and more variable than the macroelectrodes. When connected to clinical amplifiers, higher impedance electrodes produced considerable distortion of the signal at low frequencies (<60 Hz), which caused significant changes in amplitude, phase, variance and spectral band power. In contrast, there were only minimal changes to the signal content for frequencies above 100 Hz. In order to minimize distortion with microelectrodes, we determined that an acquisition system should have an input impedance of at least 1 GΩ, which is much higher than most clinical systems. These results show that it is critical to account for variations in impedance when analyzing EEG from different-sized electrodes. Data from microelectrodes may yield misleading results unless recorded with high-impedance amplifiers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22878608      PMCID: PMC3476479          DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/9/5/056007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neural Eng        ISSN: 1741-2552            Impact factor:   5.379


  21 in total

Review 1.  Electrical stimulation of excitable tissue: design of efficacious and safe protocols.

Authors:  Daniel R Merrill; Marom Bikson; John G R Jefferys
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2005-02-15       Impact factor: 2.390

2.  Tissue and electrode capacitance reduce neural activation volumes during deep brain stimulation.

Authors:  Christopher R Butson; Cameron C McIntyre
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.708

3.  In vivo measurement of cortical impedance spectrum in monkeys: implications for signal propagation.

Authors:  Nikos K Logothetis; Christoph Kayser; Axel Oeltermann
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2007-09-06       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 4.  The NEURON simulation environment.

Authors:  M L Hines; N T Carnevale
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  1997-08-15       Impact factor: 2.026

Review 5.  What is the present-day EEG evidence for a preictal state?

Authors:  William Stacey; Michel Le Van Quyen; Florian Mormann; Andreas Schulze-Bonhage
Journal:  Epilepsy Res       Date:  2011-08-31       Impact factor: 3.045

6.  The dielectric properties of biological tissues: II. Measurements in the frequency range 10 Hz to 20 GHz.

Authors:  S Gabriel; R W Lau; C Gabriel
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Conductivity of living intracranial tissues.

Authors:  J Latikka; T Kuurne; H Eskola
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Tissue impedance: a historical overview.

Authors:  E T McAdams; J Jossinet
Journal:  Physiol Meas       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 2.833

9.  Human and automated detection of high-frequency oscillations in clinical intracranial EEG recordings.

Authors:  Andrew B Gardner; Greg A Worrell; Eric Marsh; Dennis Dlugos; Brian Litt
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2007-03-23       Impact factor: 3.708

10.  Time-frequency analysis reveals decreased high-frequency oscillations in writer's cramp.

Authors:  Zoé Cimatti; Denis P Schwartz; Frédéric Bourdain; Sabine Meunier; Jean-Pierre Bleton; Marie Vidailhet; Bernard Renault; Line Garnero
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2006-09-26       Impact factor: 13.501

View more
  8 in total

1.  Generation of Monophasic Action Potentials and Intermediate Forms.

Authors:  Shahriar Iravanian; Ilija Uzelac; Conner Herndon; Jonathan J Langberg; Flavio H Fenton
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Quantitative simulation of extracellular single unit recording from the surface of cortex.

Authors:  Mackenna Hill; Estefania Rios; Shyam Kumar Sudhakar; Douglas H Roossien; Ciara Caldwell; Dawen Cai; Omar J Ahmed; Scott F Lempka; Cynthia A Chestek
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 5.379

Review 3.  Miniaturization for wearable EEG systems: recording hardware and data processing.

Authors:  Minjae Kim; Seungjae Yoo; Chul Kim
Journal:  Biomed Eng Lett       Date:  2022-06-06

4.  On the nature of seizure dynamics.

Authors:  Viktor K Jirsa; William C Stacey; Pascale P Quilichini; Anton I Ivanov; Christophe Bernard
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2014-06-11       Impact factor: 13.501

5.  Potential for unreliable interpretation of EEG recorded with microelectrodes.

Authors:  William C Stacey; Spencer Kellis; Bradley Greger; Christopher R Butson; Paras R Patel; Trevor Assaf; Temenuzhka Mihaylova; Simon Glynn
Journal:  Epilepsia       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 5.864

6.  Flexible, high-resolution thin-film electrodes for human and animal neural research.

Authors:  Chia-Han Chiang; Charles Wang; Katrina Barth; Shervin Rahimpour; Michael Trumpis; Suseendrakumar Duraivel; Iakov Rachinskiy; Agrita Dubey; Katie E Wingel; Megan Wong; Nicholas S Witham; Thomas Odell; Virginia Woods; Brinnae Bent; Werner Doyle; Daniel Friedman; Eckardt Bihler; Christopher F Reiche; Derek G Southwell; Michael M Haglund; Allan H Friedman; Shivanand P Lad; Sasha Devore; Orrin Devinsky; Florian Solzbacher; Bijan Pesaran; Gregory Cogan; Jonathan Viventi
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 5.043

7.  Theoretical analysis of the local field potential in deep brain stimulation applications.

Authors:  Scott F Lempka; Cameron C McIntyre
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-28       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Effect of Reference Scheme on Power and Phase of the Local Field Potential.

Authors:  Vinay Shirhatti; Ayon Borthakur; Supratim Ray
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 2.026

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.