Literature DB >> 24971512

A guideline for head volume conductor modeling in EEG and MEG.

Johannes Vorwerk1, Jae-Hyun Cho2, Stefan Rampp3, Hajo Hamer3, Thomas R Knösche2, Carsten H Wolters4.   

Abstract

For accurate EEG/MEG source analysis it is necessary to model the head volume conductor as realistic as possible. This includes the distinction of the different conductive compartments in the human head. In this study, we investigated the influence of modeling/not modeling the conductive compartments skull spongiosa, skull compacta, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), gray matter, and white matter and of the inclusion of white matter anisotropy on the EEG/MEG forward solution. Therefore, we created a highly realistic 6-compartment head model with white matter anisotropy and used a state-of-the-art finite element approach. Starting from a 3-compartment scenario (skin, skull, and brain), we subsequently refined our head model by distinguishing one further of the above-mentioned compartments. For each of the generated five head models, we measured the effect on the signal topography and signal magnitude both in relation to a highly resolved reference model and to the model generated in the previous refinement step. We evaluated the results of these simulations using a variety of visualization methods, allowing us to gain a general overview of effect strength, of the most important source parameters triggering these effects, and of the most affected brain regions. Thereby, starting from the 3-compartment approach, we identified the most important additional refinement steps in head volume conductor modeling. We were able to show that the inclusion of the highly conductive CSF compartment, whose conductivity value is well known, has the strongest influence on both signal topography and magnitude in both modalities. We found the effect of gray/white matter distinction to be nearly as big as that of the CSF inclusion, and for both of these steps we identified a clear pattern in the spatial distribution of effects. In comparison to these two steps, the introduction of white matter anisotropy led to a clearly weaker, but still strong, effect. Finally, the distinction between skull spongiosa and compacta caused the weakest effects in both modalities when using an optimized conductivity value for the homogenized compartment. We conclude that it is highly recommendable to include the CSF and distinguish between gray and white matter in head volume conductor modeling. Especially for the MEG, the modeling of skull spongiosa and compacta might be neglected due to the weak effects; the simplification of not modeling white matter anisotropy is admissible considering the complexity and current limitations of the underlying modeling approach.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EEG; FEM; Forward problem; MEG; Tissue conductivity anisotropy; Volume conductor modeling

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24971512     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.06.040

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  65 in total

Review 1.  Magnetoencephalography for brain electrophysiology and imaging.

Authors:  Sylvain Baillet
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Plasticity of neonatal neuronal networks in very premature infants: Source localization of temporal theta activity, the first endogenous neural biomarker, in temporoparietal areas.

Authors:  L Routier; M Mahmoudzadeh; M Panzani; H Azizollahi; S Goudjil; G Kongolo; F Wallois
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2017-01-23       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  The neural sources of N170: Understanding timing of activation in face-selective areas.

Authors:  Chuanji Gao; Stefania Conte; John E Richards; Wanze Xie; Taylor Hanayik
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2019-02-02       Impact factor: 4.016

4.  Neuroplasticity of language in left-hemisphere stroke: Evidence linking subsecond electrophysiology and structural connections.

Authors:  Vitória Piai; Lars Meyer; Nina F Dronkers; Robert T Knight
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  The Relation between Infant Covert Orienting, Sustained Attention and Brain Activity.

Authors:  Wanze Xie; John E Richards
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  2016-07-14       Impact factor: 3.020

6.  Effects of uncertainty in head tissue conductivity and complexity on EEG forward modeling in neonates.

Authors:  Hamed Azizollahi; Ardalan Aarabi; Fabrice Wallois
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-05-30       Impact factor: 5.038

7.  Measuring MEG closer to the brain: Performance of on-scalp sensor arrays.

Authors:  Joonas Iivanainen; Matti Stenroos; Lauri Parkkonen
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Benchmarking transcranial electrical stimulation finite element models: a comparison study.

Authors:  Aprinda Indahlastari; Munish Chauhan; Rosalind J Sadleir
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2019-01-03       Impact factor: 5.379

9.  Language Neuroplasticity in Brain Tumor Patients Revealed by Magnetoencephalography.

Authors:  Vitória Piai; Elke De Witte; Joanna Sierpowska; Xiaochen Zheng; Leighton B Hinkley; Danielle Mizuiri; Robert T Knight; Mitchel S Berger; Srikantan S Nagarajan
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 3.225

10.  Reproducibility of EEG-MEG fusion source analysis of interictal spikes: Relevance in presurgical evaluation of epilepsy.

Authors:  Rasheda Arman Chowdhury; Giovanni Pellegrino; Ümit Aydin; Jean-Marc Lina; François Dubeau; Eliane Kobayashi; Christophe Grova
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 5.038

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.