| Literature DB >> 26248679 |
Yvonne Blokland1, Loukianos Spyrou1, Jos Lerou2, Jo Mourisse2, Gert Jan Scheffer2, Geert-Jan van Geffen2, Jason Farquhar3, Jörgen Bruhn1.
Abstract
Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) have the potential to detect intraoperative awareness during general anaesthesia. Traditionally, BCI research is aimed at establishing or improving communication and control for patients with permanent paralysis. Patients experiencing intraoperative awareness also lack the means to communicate after administration of a neuromuscular blocker, but may attempt to move. This study evaluates the principle of detecting attempted movements from the electroencephalogram (EEG) during local temporary neuromuscular blockade. EEG was obtained from four healthy volunteers making 3-second hand movements, both before and after local administration of rocuronium in one isolated forearm. Using offline classification analysis we investigated whether the attempted movements the participants made during paralysis could be distinguished from the periods when they did not move or attempt to move. Attempted movement trials were correctly identified in 81 (68-94)% (mean (95% CI)) and 84 (74-93)% of the cases using 30 and 9 EEG channels, respectively. Similar accuracies were obtained when training the classifier on the participants' actual movements. These results provide proof of the principle that a BCI can detect movement attempts during neuromuscular blockade. Based on this, in the future a BCI may serve as a communication channel between a patient under general anaesthesia and the anaesthesiologist.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26248679 PMCID: PMC4528221 DOI: 10.1038/srep12815
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Visualization of experimental sequences.
EMG power per condition as a percentage of EMG power during ‘actual movement’.
| Subject # | actual movement | no movement | isometric | imagery | attempt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 100 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| 2 | 100 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 3.0 |
| 3 | 100 | 0.4 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 |
| 4 | 100 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 0.2 |
Figure 2Grand average EEG time-frequency plots for channel C3 (top figures) and EMG power plots (bottom figures) per condition.
For each movement condition the top plot shows EEG power over time per frequency in relative units (r.u.). These plots were computed to ascertain the presence of event-related desynchronization (ERD, blue) and -synchronization (ERS, red), the main features the classifier uses for its decisions. ‘Actual movement’, ‘Isometric movement’, ‘Attempted movement’ and ‘Imagined movement’ each show ERD during the movement task (t = 0–3 s), followed by ERS. A relative baseline over the entire trial was used, so that a value of 1 (white) represents average power, a value < 1 a power decrease or ERD and a value > 1 a power increase or ERS. The average EMG power over time is shown in the bottom plot. For the EMG plots a logarithmic scale is used on the y-axis.
Single trial cross-validated classification accuracies, expressed as percentages, for each movement condition and EEG channel set.
| 30 EEG channels | 9 EEG channels | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training & test conditions | Training & test conditions | |||||||
| Actual movement | Isometric movement | Imagined movement | Attempted movement | Actual movement | Isometric movement | Imagined movement | Attempted movement | |
| Subject # | ||||||||
| 1 | 81 (73–89) | 83 (75–91) | 73 (64–82) | 78 (68–88) | 78 (70–86) | 80 (72–88) | 69 (59–79) | 81 (72–90) |
| 2 | 83 (75–91) | 68 (58–78) | 55 (44–66) | 73 (62–84) | 81 (73–89) | 68 (58–78) | 56 (46–66) | 82 (73–91) |
| 3 | 93 (89–97) | 89 (83–95) | 73 (64–82) | 92 (87–97) | 96 (93–99) | 88 (82–94) | 78 (69–87) | 92 (87–97) |
| 4 | 79 (71–87) | 81 (73–89) | 75 (66–84) | 81 (72–90) | 92 (87–97) | 77 (68–86) | 80 (72–88) | 79 (69–89) |
| Mean | 84 (74–94) | 80 (66–94) | 69 (54–84) | 81 (68–94) | 87 (73–100) | 78 (65–91) | 71 (53–88) | 84 (74–93) |
First, separate classifiers were trained on each of the named movement conditions, using a subset of the recorded trials. Then the classification performances were estimated for each classifier on another set of trials belonging to that condition. For this procedure of performance estimation ten-fold cross-validation was used. Results are given as classification accuracy (95% CI): for each individual classification accuracy the binomial 95% CI is given, for the mean classification accuracy the standard 95% CI is given.
Single trial classification accuracies for ‘attempted movement’, expressed in percentages, for each EEG channel set.
| 30 EEG channels | 9 EEG channels | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training conditions | Training conditions | |||||
| Actual movement | Isometric movement | Imagined movement | Actual movement | Isometric movement | Imagined movement | |
| Subject # | ||||||
| 1 | 71 (60–82) | 70 (59–81) | 68 (56-80) | 71 (60–82) | 66 (54–78) | 59 (47–71) |
| 2 | 76 (66–86) | 81 (72–90) | 67 (55–79) | 69 (58–80) | 83 (74–92) | 58 (45–71) |
| 3 | 89 (82–96) | 84 (75–93) | 67 (55–79) | 91 (85–97) | 90 (84–96) | 73 (62–84) |
| 4 | 80 (70–90) | 70 (59–81) | 73 (62–84) | 78 (68–88) | 70 (59–81) | 77 (67–87) |
| Mean | 79 (67–91) | 76 (65–88) | 69 (64–73) | 77 (61–93) | 77 (59–95) | 67 (51–82) |
First, separate classifiers were trained on each of the named movement conditions. Then, classification performances were estimated on ‘attempted movement’. Results are given as classification accuracy (95% CI): for each individual classification accuracy the binomial 95% CI is given, for the mean classification accuracy the standard 95% CI is given.