Literature DB >> 27852731

Forward and inverse effects of the complete electrode model in neonatal EEG.

S Pursiainen1, S Lew2,3, C H Wolters4.   

Abstract

This paper investigates finite element method-based modeling in the context of neonatal electroencephalography (EEG). In particular, the focus lies on electrode boundary conditions. We compare the complete electrode model (CEM) with the point electrode model (PEM), which is the current standard in EEG. In the CEM, the voltage experienced by an electrode is modeled more realistically as the integral average of the potential distribution over its contact surface, whereas the PEM relies on a point value. Consequently, the CEM takes into account the subelectrode shunting currents, which are absent in the PEM. In this study, we aim to find out how the electrode voltage predicted by these two models differ, if standard size electrodes are attached to a head of a neonate. Additionally, we study voltages and voltage variation on electrode surfaces with two source locations: 1) next to the C6 electrode and 2) directly under the Fz electrode and the frontal fontanel. A realistic model of a neonatal head, including a skull with fontanels and sutures, is used. Based on the results, the forward simulation differences between CEM and PEM are in general small, but significant outliers can occur in the vicinity of the electrodes. The CEM can be considered as an integral part of the outer head model. The outcome of this study helps understanding volume conduction of neonatal EEG, since it enlightens the role of advanced skull and electrode modeling in forward and inverse computations.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The effect of the complete electrode model on electroencephalography forward and inverse computations is explored. A realistic neonatal head model, including a skull structure with fontanels and sutures, is used. The electrode and skull modeling differences are analyzed and compared with each other. The results suggest that the complete electrode model can be considered as an integral part of the outer head model. To achieve optimal source localization results, accurate electrode modeling might be necessary.
Copyright © 2017 the American Physiological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  neonatal electroencephalography; skull modeling

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27852731      PMCID: PMC5338621          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00427.2016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  36 in total

1.  Visualization of magnetoencephalographic data using minimum current estimates.

Authors:  K Uutela; M Hämäläinen; E Somersalo
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  Effects of electrode properties on EEG measurements and a related inverse problem.

Authors:  J O Ollikainen; M Vauhkonen; P A Karjalainen; J P Kaipio
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.242

3.  Neuroelectromagnetic forward head modeling toolbox.

Authors:  Zeynep Akalin Acar; Scott Makeig
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2010-05-08       Impact factor: 2.390

4.  Modeling of the human skull in EEG source analysis.

Authors:  Moritz Dannhauer; Benjamin Lanfer; Carsten H Wolters; Thomas R Knösche
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  Bioelectromagnetic forward problem: isolated source approach revis(it)ed.

Authors:  M Stenroos; J Sarvas
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-05-11       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Cortical surface-based analysis. I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction.

Authors:  A M Dale; B Fischl; M I Sereno
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Computational aspects of finite element modeling in EEG source localization.

Authors:  K A Awada; D R Jackson; J T Williams; D R Wilton; S B Baumann; A C Papanicolaou
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 4.538

8.  The effect of fontanel on scalp EEG potentials in the neonate.

Authors:  P Gargiulo; P Belfiore; E A Friðgeirsson; S Vanhatalo; C Ramon
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 3.708

9.  Optimization of focality and direction in dense electrode array transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

Authors:  Seyhmus Guler; Moritz Dannhauer; Burak Erem; Rob Macleod; Don Tucker; Sergei Turovets; Phan Luu; Deniz Erdogmus; Dana H Brooks
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2016-05-06       Impact factor: 5.379

10.  Improving Interference Control in ADHD Patients with Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS).

Authors:  Carolin Breitling; Tino Zaehle; Moritz Dannhauer; Björn Bonath; Jana Tegelbeckers; Hans-Henning Flechtner; Kerstin Krauel
Journal:  Front Cell Neurosci       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 5.505

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  IFCN-endorsed practical guidelines for clinical magnetoencephalography (MEG).

Authors:  Riitta Hari; Sylvain Baillet; Gareth Barnes; Richard Burgess; Nina Forss; Joachim Gross; Matti Hämäläinen; Ole Jensen; Ryusuke Kakigi; François Mauguière; Nobukatzu Nakasato; Aina Puce; Gian-Luca Romani; Alfons Schnitzler; Samu Taulu
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 3.708

2.  FEMfuns: A Volume Conduction Modeling Pipeline that Includes Resistive, Capacitive or Dispersive Tissue and Electrodes.

Authors:  M Vermaas; M C Piastra; T F Oostendorp; N F Ramsey; P H E Tiesinga
Journal:  Neuroinformatics       Date:  2020-10

3.  A comprehensive study on electroencephalography and magnetoencephalography sensitivity to cortical and subcortical sources.

Authors:  Maria Carla Piastra; Andreas Nüßing; Johannes Vorwerk; Maureen Clerc; Christian Engwer; Carsten H Wolters
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2020-11-06       Impact factor: 5.399

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.