Literature DB >> 8260323

Comparison of single current dipole and magnetic field tomography analyses of the cortical response to auditory stimuli.

A A Ioannides1, K D Singh, R Hasson, S B Baumann, R L Rogers, F C Guinto, A C Papanicolaou.   

Abstract

Measurements of the magnetic field elicited by a 50 ms long auditory stimulus, from three normal subjects and one head injured subject, are used to estimate the three dimensional distribution of generators in the brain. The resulting images are compared with point source solutions obtained with the usual single current dipole fitting procedures, over a latency range which includes the extrema in the (average) measured signal. In all cases considered, 100 or so epochs time-locked to the stimulus were magnetically recorded. These were averaged, and then analyzed using two techniques; a new distributed current model known as Magnetic Field Tomography (MFT), and the standard single current dipole (SCD) model. Both methods provide estimates of the current generators in the brain. In two of the normal subjects, the MFT solutions are super-imposed onto Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI) of the relevant cortical area. The results show that when the SCD model provides a reasonable description of the data, the MFT estimate shows one dominant localized region in agreement with the current dipole position. In the MFT sequence of solutions the activity evolves smoothly; multiple areas of activity often arise as the focal activity in one region declines while focal activity in another region grows. In contrast the SCD solutions during these intermediate periods fit the data poorly, and may move erratically from one locale to another. We conclude that MFT seems to provide a reasonable description of the activity through cortical and subcortical regions. The evolution of activity, as derived from the average signal, can be traced continuously from the onset of the stimulus, not just at the peaks.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8260323     DOI: 10.1007/bf01234124

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Topogr        ISSN: 0896-0267            Impact factor:   3.020


  13 in total

1.  Dipole source localization in the study of EP generators: a critique.

Authors:  A Z Snyder
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1991 Jul-Aug

2.  MEG versus EEG localization test.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 10.422

3.  The brain's magnetic field: some effects of multiple sources on localization methods.

Authors:  P L Nunez
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1986-01

4.  Comparison of magnetoencephalography with other functional imaging techniques.

Authors:  A A Ioannides
Journal:  Clin Phys Physiol Meas       Date:  1991

5.  Source localization of two evoked magnetic field components using two alternative procedures.

Authors:  A C Papanicolaou; R L Rogers; S Baumann; C Saydjari; H M Eisenberg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Evoked dipole source potentials of the human auditory cortex.

Authors:  M Scherg; D Von Cramon
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1986-09

7.  Neuromagnetic fields evoked by a patterned on-offset stimulus.

Authors:  W J Kouijzer; C J Stok; D Reits; Z Dunajski; F H Lopes da Silva; M J Peters
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1985-06       Impact factor: 4.538

8.  Neuromagnetic somatosensory homunculus: a non-invasive approach in humans.

Authors:  L Narici; I Modena; R J Opsomer; V Pizzella; G L Romani; G Torrioli; R Traversa; P M Rossini
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  1991-01-02       Impact factor: 3.046

9.  Magnetic field tomography of coherent thalamocortical 40-Hz oscillations in humans.

Authors:  U Ribary; A A Ioannides; K D Singh; R Hasson; J P Bolton; F Lado; A Mogilner; R Llinás
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1991-12-15       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  MEG versus EEG localization test using implanted sources in the human brain.

Authors:  D Cohen; B N Cuffin; K Yunokuchi; R Maniewski; C Purcell; G R Cosgrove; J Ives; J G Kennedy; D L Schomer
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 10.422

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  How can EEG/MEG and fMRI/PET data be combined?

Authors:  Barry Horwitz; David Poeppel
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  A correlation study of averaged and single trial MEG signals: the average describes multiple histories each in a different set of single trials.

Authors:  L Liu; A A Ioannides
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 3.020

3.  MEG source imaging method using fast L1 minimum-norm and its applications to signals with brain noise and human resting-state source amplitude images.

Authors:  Ming-Xiong Huang; Charles W Huang; Ashley Robb; AnneMarie Angeles; Sharon L Nichols; Dewleen G Baker; Tao Song; Deborah L Harrington; Rebecca J Theilmann; Ramesh Srinivasan; David Heister; Mithun Diwakar; Jose M Canive; J Christopher Edgar; Yu-Han Chen; Zhengwei Ji; Max Shen; Fady El-Gabalawy; Michael Levy; Robert McLay; Jennifer Webb-Murphy; Thomas T Liu; Angela Drake; Roland R Lee
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Estimates of brain activity using magnetic field tomography in a GO/NOGO avoidance paradigm.

Authors:  P B Fenwick; A A Ioannides; G W Fenton; J Lunsden; P Grummich; H Kober; A Daun; J Vieth
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.020

5.  BA3b and BA1 activate in a serial fashion after median nerve stimulation: direct evidence from combining source analysis of evoked fields and cytoarchitectonic probabilistic maps.

Authors:  Christos Papadelis; Simon B Eickhoff; Karl Zilles; Andreas A Ioannides
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-08-04       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  In vivo validation of distributed source solutions for the biomagnetic inverse problem.

Authors:  A A Ioannides; R Muratore; M Balish; S Sato
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.020

7.  Frontal and superior temporal auditory processing abnormalities in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Yu-Han Chen; J Christopher Edgar; Mingxiong Huang; Michael A Hunter; Emerson Epstein; Breannan Howell; Brett Y Lu; Juan Bustillo; Gregory A Miller; José M Cañive
Journal:  Neuroimage Clin       Date:  2013-05-15       Impact factor: 4.881

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.