MEG and EEG in epilepsy

被引:153
|
作者
Barkley, GL
Baumgartner, C
机构
[1] Henry Ford Hosp & Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Neurol, Neuromagnetism Lab, Detroit, MI 48202 USA
[2] Case Western Reserve Univ, Dept Neurol, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[3] Neurol Univ Clin, Dept Clin Epilepsy Res, Vienna, Austria
关键词
epilepsy; interictal spikes; seizures; MEG; mapetoencephalography; EEG; electroencephalography; source localization; single equivalent current dipole; forward problem; inverse problem;
D O I
10.1097/00004691-200305000-00002
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Both EEG and magnetoencephalogram (MEG), with a time resolution of 1 ms or less, provide unique neurophysiologic data not obtainable by other neuroimaging techniques. MEG has now emerged as a mature clinical technology. While both EEG and MEG can be performed with more than 100 channels, MEG recordings with 100 to 300 channels are more easily done because of the time needed to apply a large number of EEG electrodes. EEG has the advantage of the long-term video EEG recordings, which facilitates extensive temporal sampling across all periods of the sleep/wake cycle. MEG and EEG seem to complement each other for the detection of interictal epileptiform discharges, because some spikes can be recorded only on MEG but not on EEG and vice versa. Most studies indicate that MEG seems to be more sensitive for neocortical spike sources. Both EEG and MEG source localizations show excellent agreement with invasive electrical recordings, clarify the spatial relationship between the irritative zone and structural lesions, and finally, attribute epileptic activity to lobar subcompartments in temporal lobe and to a lesser extent in extratemporal epilepsies. In temporal lobe epilepsy, EEG and MEG can differentiate between patients with mesial, lateral and diffuse seizure onsets. MEG selectively detects tangential sources. EEG measures both radial and tangential activity, although the radial components dominate the EEG signals at the scalp. Thus, while EEG provides more comprehensive information, it is more complicated to model due to considerable influences of the shape and conductivity of the volume conductor. Dipole localization techniques favor MEG due to the higher accuracy of MEG source localization compared to EEG when using the standard spherical head shape model. However, if special care is taken to address the above issues and enhance the EEG, the localization accuracy of EEG and MEG actually are comparable, although these surface EEG analytic techniques are not typically approved for clinical use in the United States. MEG dipole analysis is approved for clinical use and thus gives information that otherwise usually requires invasive intracranial EEG monitoring. There are only a few dozen whole head MEG units in operation in the world. While EEG is available in every hospital, specialized EEG laboratories capable of source localization techniques are nearly as scarce as MEG facilities. The combined use of whole-head MEG systems and multichannel EEG in conjunction with advanced source modeling techniques is an area of active development and will allow a better noninvasive characterization of the irritative zone in presurgical epilepsy evaluation. Finally, additional information on epilepsy may be gathered by either MEG or EEG analysis of data beyond the usual bandwidths used in clinical practice, namely by analysis of activity at high frequencies and near-DC activity.
引用
收藏
页码:163 / 178
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Distinguishing between moving and stationary sources using EEG/MEG measurements with an application to epilepsy
    Yetik, IS
    Nehorai, A
    Lewine, JD
    Muravchik, CH
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2005, 52 (03) : 471 - 479
  • [32] Spatial fidelity of MEG/EEG source estimates: A general evaluation approach
    Samuelsson, John G.
    Peled, Noam
    Mamashli, Fahimeh
    Ahveninen, Jyrki
    Hamalainen, Matti S.
    NEUROIMAGE, 2021, 224
  • [33] Hierarchical multiscale Bayesian algorithm for robust MEG/EEG source reconstruction
    Cai, Chang
    Sekihara, Kensuke
    Nagarajan, Srikantan S.
    NEUROIMAGE, 2018, 183 : 698 - 715
  • [34] High-resolution EEG (HR-EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG)
    Gavaret, M.
    Maillard, L.
    Jung, J.
    NEUROPHYSIOLOGIE CLINIQUE-CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2015, 45 (01): : 105 - 111
  • [35] High-resolution EEG (HR-EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG)
    Gavaret, M.
    Badier, J. -M.
    Chauvel, P.
    NEUROCHIRURGIE, 2008, 54 (03) : 185 - 190
  • [36] Bayesian model averaging in EEG/MEG imaging
    Trujillo-Barreto, NJ
    Aubert-Vázquez, E
    Valdés-Sosa, PA
    NEUROIMAGE, 2004, 21 (04) : 1300 - 1319
  • [37] Localization techniques for EEG and MEG in children and adolescents
    Brandl, U
    NERVENHEILKUNDE, 1999, 18 (06) : 282 - 286
  • [38] MEG in frontal epilepsy
    Rampp, Stefan
    Kasper, Burkhard
    Brandner, Sebastian
    Hamer, Hajo
    Buchfelder, Michael
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR EPILEPTOLOGIE, 2022, 35 (01): : 29 - 31
  • [39] Epilepsy and EEG in the elderly
    Van Cott, AC
    EPILEPSIA, 2002, 43 : 94 - 102
  • [40] How to use fMRI functional localizers to improve EEG/MEG source estimation
    Cottereau, Benoit R.
    Ales, Justin M.
    Norcia, Anthony M.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE METHODS, 2015, 250 : 64 - 73