| Literature DB >> 24961699 |
Thierry Castermans1, Matthieu Duvinage2, Guy Cheron3, Thierry Dutoit4.
Abstract
In the last few years, significant progress has been made in the field of walk rehabilitation. Motor cortex signals in bipedal monkeys have been interpreted to predict walk kinematics. Epidural electrical stimulation in rats and in one young paraplegic has been realized to partially restore motor control after spinal cord injury. However, these experimental trials are far from being applicable to all patients suffering from motor impairments. Therefore, it is thought that more simple rehabilitation systems are desirable in the meanwhile. The goal of this review is to describe and summarize the progress made in the development of non-invasive brain-computer interfaces dedicated to motor rehabilitation systems. In the first part, the main principles of human locomotion control are presented. The paper then focuses on the mechanisms of supra-spinal centers active during gait, including results from electroencephalography, functional brain imaging technologies [near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), positron-emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission-computed tomography (SPECT)] and invasive studies. The first brain-computer interface (BCI) applications to gait rehabilitation are then presented, with a discussion about the different strategies developed in the field. The challenges to raise for future systems are identified and discussed. Finally, we present some proposals to address these challenges, in order to contribute to the improvement of BCI for gait rehabilitation.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24961699 PMCID: PMC4066236 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci4010001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Sci ISSN: 2076-3425
Figure 1.Illustration of different phases of the gait cycle. (A) New gait terms; (B) classic gait terms; and (C) Percentage of gait cycle. Note: this figure is adapted with permission from [16]; Copyright Demos Medical Publishing Inc., 2004.
Subdivisions of the stance and swing phases of the gait cycle.
| Loading response (0%–10%) | Begins with initial contact, the instant when the foot contacts the ground. Normally, the heel contacts the ground first. The loading response ends with the contralateral toe off, when the opposite extremity leaves the ground. Thus, the loading response corresponds to the gait cycle's first period of double limb support. | |
| Mid-stance (10%–30%) | Begins with the contralateral toe off and ends when the center of gravity is directly over the reference foot. Note that this phase, and early terminal stance, the phase discussed next, are the only times in the gait cycle when the body's center of gravity truly lies over the base of support. | |
| Terminal stance (30%–50%) | Begins when the center of gravity is over the supporting foot and ends when the contralateral foot contacts the ground. During terminal stance, the heel rises from the ground. | |
| Preswing (50%–60%) | Begins at the contralateral initial contact and ends at the toe off. Thus, the preswing corresponds to the gait cycle's second period of double limb support. | |
| Initial swing (60%–70%) | Begins at toe off and continues until maximum knee flexion (60 degrees). | |
| Mid-swing (70%–80%) | The period from maximum knee flexion until the tibia is vertical or perpendicular to the ground. | |
| Terminal swing (80%–100%) | Begins where the tibia is vertical and ends at initial contact. |
Figure 2Influence of walking speed on joint trajectories. Joint trajectories of the (A) hip, (B) knee and (C) ankle joint at 10 different walking speeds (this figure is reproduced with permission from [17]; Copyright IOS Press, 2010).
Figure 3Influence of walking speed on electromyographic (EMG) activity patterns. EMG activity patterns during different walking speeds of the (A) gluteus maximus (GL); (B) rectus femoris (RF); (C) vastus lateralis (VL); (D) vastus medialis (VM); (E) lateral hamstrings (HL); (F) medial hamstrings (HM); (G) tibialis anterior (TA); and (H) gastrocnemius medialis (GM) muscles. EMG signals were normalized for each subject and each condition by setting the difference between the lowest and highest EMG amplitude at 100% and normalizing the curve according to this value (this figure is reproduced with permission from [17]; Copyright IOS Press, 2010).
Figure 4Model of the different pathways indicating how afferents can act on the central pattern generator (CPG) during the stance phase of locomotion. The CPG contains a mutually inhibiting extensor and flexor half-center (EHC and FHC, respectively). During the stance phase, the load of the lower limb is detected by group I extensor muscle afferents and group II (low threshold) cutaneous afferents, which activate the EHC. In this way, extensor activity is reinforced during the loading period of the stance phase. At the end of the stance phase, group Ia afferents of flexor muscles excite the FHC (which inhibits the EHC) and, thereby, initiate the onset of the swing phase (this figure is reproduced with permission from [42]; Copyright Elsevier, 1998).
Figure 5Global view of the human locomotion machinery (this figure is reproduced with permission from [63]; Copyright Springer-Verlag, 2005; see text for details).
An overview of neuroimaging methods. Direct methods detect electrical or magnetic activity of the brain, while metabolic methods are considered as indirect methods of imaging (adapted from [65]). EEG, electroencephalographic; MEG, magnetoencephalography; ECoG, electrocorticography; LFP, local field potential; MUA, multi-unit activity; SUA, single-unit activity; fMRI, functional magnetic resonance imaging; SPECT, single-photon emission-computed tomography; PET, positron-emission-tomography; NIRS, near-infrared spectroscopy.
| EEG | Electrical | ∼0.001 s | ∼ 10 mm | Non-invasive | Portable |
| MEG | Magnetic | ∼0.05 s | ∼ 5 mm | Non-invasive | Non-portable |
| ECoG | Electrical | ∼0.003 s | ∼ 1 mm | Slightly invasive | Portable |
| Intracortical neuron recording | Electrical | ∼0.003 s | ∼0.5 mm (LFP) | Strongly invasive | Portable |
| ∼0.1 mm (MUA) | |||||
| ∼0.05 mm (SUA) | |||||
| fMRI | Metabolic | ∼1 s | ∼ 1 mm | Non-invasive | Non-portable |
| SPECT | Metabolic | ∼10 s–30 min | ∼ 1 cm | Non-invasive | Non-portable |
| PET | Metabolic | ∼0.2 s | ∼ 1 mm | Non-invasive | Non-portable |
| NIRS | Metabolic | ∼1 s | ∼2 cm | Non-invasive | Portable |
An overview of the results obtained by different functional neuroimaging studies of gait in healthy subjects.
| Fukuyama | SPECT | Real gait (on ground) | During gait, increased activity in the supplementary motor area (SMA), medial primary sensorimotor area, striatum, cerebellar vermis and visual cortex |
| Hanakawa | SPECT | Real gait (on treadmill) | Cerebral activity during walking also observed in the dorsal brainstem |
| Miyai | MRS | Real gait (on treadmill) | Walking increases cerebral activity bilaterally in the medial primary sensorimotor cortices and the SMA |
| Suzuki | NIRS | Real gait at different speeds (on treadmill) | Increase of cerebral activity in the prefrontal cortex and premotor cortex as locomotor speed increases; cerebral activity in the medial sensorimotor cortex not influenced by locomotor speed |
| Malouin | PET | Motor imagery of standing, gait initiation, real walking, walking with obstacles | Motor imagery of walking increases activity in the pre-SMA (compared to imagined standing); in the left visual cortex and caudate nucleus (compared to imagery of gait initiation) |
| Jahn | fMRI | Motor imagery of standing, walking and running | Cerebellar activation increased during motor imagery of running, not during motor imagery of walking and standing; vestibular and somatosensory cortex were deactivated during running, but not during walking |
| Miyai | NIRS/fMRI | Repetitive foot movements | Foot-extension flexion movements generate a similar brain activation pattern to that associated with walking |
| Sahyoun | fMRI | Active | During active movements, an increase of cerebral activity in the somatosensory cortex, SMA, cingulate motor area, secondary somatosensory cortex, insular cortices, putamen, thalamus and cerebellum |
| De Jong | PET | Antiphase flexion and extension movements | Cerebral activations distributed over the right anterior parietal and right dorsal premotor cortex |
| Christensen | PET | Bicycle movements | Both passive and active bicycling increase cerebral activity bilaterally in primary sensorimotor cortices, SMA and the anterior part of the cerebellum. |
| La Fougère | PET/fMRI | Real | During real and imagined locomotion: activations in the frontal cortex, cerebellum, pontomesencephalic tegmentum, parahippocampal, fusiform and occipital gyri; deactivations in the multisensory vestibular cortices (superior temporal gyrus, inferior parietal lobule). Real steady-state locomotion seems to use a direct pathway via the primary motor cortex, whereas imagined modulatory locomotion uses an indirect pathway via a supplementary motor cortex and basal ganglia loop. |
Figure 6Comparison of real (PET) and imagined locomotion (fMRI) brain activations (this figure is reproduced with permission from [105]; Copyright Elsevier, 2010). Sagittal midline and render views are shown. It can be seen that during real locomotion, the primary motor sensory cortices (pre- and post-central gyri) are active (left) as compared to the supplementary motor areas (superior and medial frontal gyri) in mental imagery of locomotion (right). Furthermore during imagined locomotion, the basal ganglia (caudate nucleus, putamen) are active, which is not the case for real locomotion.
Figure 7Illustration of the executive and planning networks of locomotion, as suggested in [105]. Execution of locomotion in a non-modulatory steady state (left side) goes from the primary motor cortex areas directly to the spinal central pattern generators (CPG), thereby bypassing the basal ganglia and the brainstem locomotor centers. A feedback loop runs from the spinal cord to the cerebellum and, thereby, via the thalamus to the cortex. For planning and modulation of locomotion (right side), cortical locomotor signals originate in the prefrontal supplementary motor areas and are transmitted through the basal ganglia via disinhibition of the subthalamic locomotor region (SLR) and mesencephalic locomotor region (MLR), where they converge with cerebellar signals from the cerebellar locomotor region (CLR). The MLR functionally represents a cross point for motor information form basal ganglia and cerebellar loops. Descending anatomical projections are directed to the medullary and pontine reticular formations (PMRF) and the spinal cord; ascending projections are in the main part concentrated on the basal ganglia and the non-specific nuclei of the thalamus (not shown for the sake of clarity). The CLR also projects via the thalamus back to the cortex. Cortical signals are furthermore modulated via a thalamo-cortical-basal ganglia circuit. The schematic drawing shows a hypothetical concept of a direct pathway of steady-state locomotion (left) and an indirect pathway of modulatory locomotion (right). SMA, supplementary motor cortex. This figure is reproduced with permission from [105]; Copyright Elsevier, 2010.
EEG studies of human locomotion: a schematic view of recent results obtained with static and dynamic experimental protocols. M1 is the primary motor cortex; PMC is the premotor cortex; SMA is the supplementary motor cortex; CC is the cingulate cortex; S1 is the primary somatosensory cortex; and SA is the somatosensory association cortex; Cz is the medial central region. BCI, brain-computer interface; FES, functional electrical stimulation; ICA, independent component analysis; ERD, event-related synchronization; ERS, event-related desynchronization; CCA, canonical correlation analysis; ERSP, event-related spectral perturbation.
| Raethjen | Rhythmic foot movements | Static/no cleaning | Central midline region and frontal mesial area | Stepping frequency and |
| Wieser | Assisted lower-limb movements | Static/no cleaning | Ml, PMC, SMA, CC, S1, SA | No frequency analysis. Activations are directly related to specific phases of the gait-like movements |
| Do | BCI dedicated to a FES system for ankle movement | Static/no cleaning | Mid-central areas (electrode Cz) | |
| Gwin | EEG activity during treadmill walking | Dynamic/ICA cleaning (AMICA) | Anterior cingulate, posterior parietal and sensorimotor cortex | |
| Presacco | Neural decoding of treadmill walking from EEG signals | Dynamic/no cleaning | Involvement of a broad fronto-posterior cortical network | Delta band (0.1–2 Hz) |
| Severens | Detection of ERD/ERS during walking | Dynamic/CCA cleaning | ERD found in the | ERSPs in |
| Wagner | Robotic-assisted treadmill walking | Dynamic/ICA cleaning (Infomax) | Central midline areas | |
| Petersen | Treadmill walking | Dynamic/coherence analysis | Significant coherence between EEG (Cz) and EMG (tibialis anterior) before the heel strike | Coherence between 24 and 40 Hz; evidence that the coupling is not due to non-physiological artifacts |
Figure 8Time-frequency plots (wavelet transformation) of LFP oscillations during gait cycle. Upper row (A) and (B): analyzed electrode pair. The right electrode pair is on the right side. (C) and (D): goniometer traces. Modulation of LFPs occurs in the 6–11 Hz frequency range. In this frequency band, amplitudes are upregulated during the early stance phase and swing phase of the contralateral leg. LL: left leg; RL: right leg; Gonio: goniometer; Flex: flexion. This figure is reproduced with permission from [142]; Copyright Elsevier, 2011.
Figure 9General scheme of a classical brain-computer interface (BCI): first of all, the subject performs a specific mental task in order to produce a signal of interest in his brain; then, this signal is acquired and generally pre-processed in order to get rid of different artifacts. Afterwards, some discriminating features are extracted and classified (pattern recognition) to determine which specific signal was produced. Finally, the identified signal is associated with a specific action to be performed by a computer or any electronic device.
Figure 10When looking at a Bereitschaftspotential (BP) signal, three main sections are observed: no potential, a slow decreasing potential early BP and a steeper late BP (this figure is reproduced with permission from [154]; Copyright Elsevier, 2005). MRCP is the movement-related cortical potential.
Figure 11It clearly appears that the BP potentials are similar for all five tasks. A classification between those tasks would be difficult. The potentials are strong over the motor cortex area close to the midline (MS is the movement start). This figure is reproduced with permission from [108]; Copyright Elsevier, 2005.
Several studies of EEG signals preceding lower limb motor tasks are available. The presented results show that it should be feasible to activate a prosthetic/rehabilitation device. SCI, spinal cord injury.
| Niazi | Ankle dorsiflexion movement without cues | BP | Predicted the movement with an average true positive rate of 82.5% around 187 ms before movement onset |
| Morash | Perform or imagine right-hand, left-hand, tongue or right-foot movement after a “Go” cue. | ERD/ERS | Predicting which of the four movements/imageries is about to occur is possible (around 40% accuracy) |
| Velu | Natural walking from a starting position to a designated ending position, pointing at a designated position from the starting position or remaining standing at the starting position. | BP | Significant classification achieved for all conditions, with errors for movement |
| Do | Detection of EEG patterns related to repetitive foot dorsiflexions | Activations in the Cz electrode | Foot lifter rehabilitation system based on FES (online performance near 100% using FFT-based features) |
| King | Motor imagery of walking or idling executed by participants with paraplegia or tetraplegia due to SCI | ERD/ERS | The EEG power in the 9–13 Hz band in the mid-frontal (FCz), central (Cz) and central-parietal (CPz) areas were the most different, comparing walking and idling imagery; classification accuracy from 60 to 90% |
| Leeb | One tetraplegic patient imagines movements of his paralyzed feet | Detection of | Control of a wheelchair in a virtual environment (go/stop). Classification results ranging from 90 to 100% |
Only one study suggests a direct decoding of brain signals into lower limb kinematics. However, it was severely called into question by [121].
| Presacco | EEG to kinematics translation | None | Tries to reproduce results obtained by invasive studies (the RMSvalue between prediction and measurement is around 0.68); highly criticized by [ |
| Wagner | EEG | Lokomat | No control: evaluation of level of participation in robotic-assisted treadmill walking (Fz and Pz difference between active and passive walk) |
| Tanaka | NIRS | Exoskeleton | Body motion support-type mobile suit Comparison of the cerebral activity during walking using the suit and normal gait without the suit; recommendations: most effective for gait training to actually walk and not stay fixed in one location; important for patients to swing their arms during gait training in rehabilitation |
A few applications. SSVEP, steady-state visually evoked potential; PCPG, programmable central pattern generator.
| Cheron | EEG (BCI) | Exoskeleton (LOPES)/foot lifter orthosis | Results from the Mindwalker and Bio-fact projects |
| Mc Daid | EEC (SSVEP) | Control of a lower limb exoskeleton; studies motion intent detection and continuous control by the BCI | The control appears feasible |
| Duvinage | EEG (SSVEP) | Scanning of the brain response from 10 Hz to 46 Hz | Gait influences the SSVEP brain response |
| Duvinage | EEG (P300) plus PCPG | Foot lifter orthosis | Reliable proof of concept |
| Li | Humanoid robot control thanks to BCI | None | Identification of mental activities when the subject is thinking “turning right,” “turning left” or “walking forward” |
| Zhang | EEG (SSVEP) plus CPG | None | Walk rehabilitation system that recognizes five types of intention related to human walking; successful classification accuracy above 80%; functional using online EEG data |