| Literature DB >> 30327592 |
Olena G Filatova1, Yuan Yang1,2, Julius P A Dewald1,2, Runfeng Tian1, Pablo Maceira-Elvira1,3, Yusuke Takeda4,5, Gert Kwakkel6, Okito Yamashita4,5, Frans C T van der Helm1,2.
Abstract
In hemiparetic stroke, functional recovery of paretic limb may occur with the reorganization of neural networks in the brain. Neuroimaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have a high spatial resolution which can be used to reveal anatomical changes in the brain following a stroke. However, low temporal resolution of MRI provides less insight of dynamic changes of brain activity. In contrast, electro-neurophysiological techniques, such as electroencephalography (EEG), have an excellent temporal resolution to measure such transient events, however are hindered by its low spatial resolution. This proof-of-principle study assessed a novel multimodal brain imaging technique namely Variational Bayesian Multimodal Encephalography (VBMEG), which aims to improve the spatial resolution of EEG for tracking the information flow inside the brain and its changes following a stroke. The limitations of EEG are complemented by constraints derived from anatomical MRI and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). EEG data were acquired from individuals suffering from a stroke as well as able-bodied participants while electrical stimuli were delivered sequentially at their index finger in the left and right hand, respectively. The locations of active sources related to this stimulus were precisely identified, resulting in high Variance Accounted For (VAF above 80%). An accurate estimation of dynamic information flow between sources was achieved in this study, showing a high VAF (above 90%) in the cross-validation test. The estimated dynamic information flow was compared between chronic hemiparetic stroke and able-bodied individuals. The results demonstrate the feasibility of VBMEG method in revealing the changes of information flow in the brain after stroke. This study verified the VBMEG method as an advanced computational approach to track the dynamic information flow in the brain following a stroke. This may lead to the development of a quantitative tool for monitoring functional changes of the cortical neural networks after a unilateral brain injury and therefore facilitate the research into, and the practice of stroke rehabilitation.Entities:
Keywords: EEG; brain dynamics; diffusion MRI; somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP); stroke
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30327592 PMCID: PMC6174251 DOI: 10.3389/fncir.2018.00079
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neural Circuits ISSN: 1662-5110 Impact factor: 3.492
Information of stroke subjects.
| Stroke 1 | Right | 58 | 8 | 2009 |
| Stroke 2 | Left | 66 | 8 | 2009 |
FM, Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity Assessment Score; EmNSA, the Erasmus MC modification of the Nottingham Sensory Assessment.
Figure 1Lesion locations for two stroke subjects shown on an axial slice of the T1-weighted anatomic images.
Figure 2Workflow of the VBMEG method. EEG, anatomic and diffusion weighted MRIs are first preprocessed. Then EEG sources are estimated using hVB approach. By combining sources and anatomical connections extracted from diffusion MRI, the linear connectome dynamics model is built leading to the estimation of dynamic information flow traveling between sources. The results are visualized individually for each subject dataset.
Figure 3Normalized ERP at the channel C3 for a control and a stroke subject with stimulus on right hand. The ERP plotting at C3 shows great similarity for both control and stroke. The latency of P50 peak for stroke is slightly larger than that of control.
Figure 4Brain topographies of the P50 peak for control and stroke subjects when a dominant hand (for controls) or an affected hand (for stroke) is stimulated. (A,B) Controls, (C) stroke 1, (D) stroke 2.
The VAF of EEG source localization (inverse model) for each subject.
| Control 1 | 94.49 | 96.28 |
| Control 2 | 93.64 | 92.27 |
| Stroke 1 | 90.03 | 87.12 |
| Stroke 2 | 85.63 | 83.79 |
Figure 5Source interactions estimated from LCD model. The plots show the information flow between P50 and N100 for each subject and anatomic connections between the active sources estimated via white matter tractography based on the individual dMRI acquisitions. The gray lines indicate the whole fiber network involved in the transmission of somatosensory information flow through the brain. The blue lines show the currently active fibers, and red dots are the currently active sources on the cortex at the specific time points. The “active sources” here denotes the sources have electrical neural activities at the presented time point, while “active fibers” indicate the fibers where the information flow is traveling through. For each subject projection of all axial slices (top) and of all sagittal slices (bottom) are shown. (A,B) Controls, (C) stroke 1, (D) stroke 2. For the full visualization see Supplementary Material.
The average VAF of the dynamic model estimation with standard deviation for all subjects.
| Control 1 | 97.77 | 12.42 | 97.77 | 12.41 |
| Control 2 | 97.58 | 10.00 | 97.78 | 12.42 |
| Stroke 1 | 92.30 | 14.80 | 93.75 | 12.06 |
| Stroke 2 | 91.69 | 11.58 | 92.86 | 10.47 |
Signal to noise ratio of data acquisition in each subject when the corresponding hand was stimulated.
| Control 1 | 14.22 | 96.35 | 13.76 | 95.97 |
| Control 2 | 13.45 | 95.68 | 15.28 | 97.12 |
| Stroke 1 | 7.64 | 85.30 | 8.62 | 87.92 |
| Stroke 2 | 9.92 | 90.76 | 8.71 | 88.13 |
In Stroke 1 case left hand was impaired. In Stroke 2 case right hand was impaired.
Figure 6Matrices of the LCD model coefficients for controls (A,B) and stroke participants (C,D).
Number and percentage of intra-hemispheric vs. inter-hemispheric interactions represented by non-zero LCD model coefficients.
| Control 1 | 4,956 | 89.3 | 594 | 10.7 |
| Control 2 | 4,930 | 93.51 | 342 | 6.49 |
| Stroke 1 | 11,868 | 84.18 | 2,230 | 15.82 |
| Stroke 2 | 11,274 | 76.51 | 3,462 | 23.49 |
Figure 7False positives (indicated by the black dots in the maps) of functional connectivity generated by correlation metrics without involving anatomical constraints. (A,B) Controls, (C) stroke 1, (D) stroke 2.
Number of false positives (FP) and false discovery rate, i.e., FP/(FP + TP) × 100%, generated by correlation metrics without involving anatomical constraints.
| Control 1 | 5,342 | 49.05 |
| Control 2 | 3,598 | 40.56 |
| Stroke 1 | 2,084 | 12.88 |
| Stroke 2 | 2,896 | 16.42 |
TP, true positive.