Mapping the Signal-To-Noise-Ratios of Cortical Sources in Magnetoencephalography and Electroencephalography

被引:192
作者
Goldenholz, Daniel M. [1 ,2 ]
Ahlfors, Seppo P. [1 ,3 ]
Haemaelaeinen, Matti S. [1 ,3 ]
Sharon, Dahlia [1 ]
Ishitobi, Mamiko [1 ]
Vaina, Lucia M. [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Stufflebeam, Steven M. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Athinoula A Martinos Ctr Biomed Imaging, Charlestown, MA 02129 USA
[2] Boston Univ, Dept Biomed Engn, Boston, MA 02215 USA
[3] MIT, Harvard Mit Div Hlth Sci & Technol, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
[4] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Dept Neurol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
关键词
MEG; EEG; epilepsy; forward model; SNR; simulation; dipole; cortex; brain; TEMPORAL-LOBE EPILEPSY; SURFACE-BASED ANALYSIS; LOCALIZATION ACCURACY; EPILEPTIFORM ACTIVITY; DIPOLE LOCALIZATION; COORDINATE SYSTEM; MEG DATA; EEG; HEAD; RECONSTRUCTION;
D O I
10.1002/hbm.20571
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Although magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electroencephalograph), (EEG) have been available for decades, their relative merits are still debated. We examined regional differences in signal-to-noise-ratios (SNRs) of cortical sources in MEG and EEG. Data from four subjects were used to simulate focal and extended Sources located on the cortical surface reconstructed from high-resolution magnetic resonance images. The SNR maps for MEG and EEG were found to be complementary. The SNR of deep sources was larger in EEG than in MEG, whereas the opposite was typically the case for Superficial Sources. Overall, the SNR maps were more uniform for EEG than for MEG. When using a noise model based on Uniformly distributed random sources on the cortex, the SNR in MEG was found to be underestimated, compared with the maps obtained with noise estimated from actual recorded MEG and EEG data. With extended Sources, the total area of cortex in which the SNR was higher in EEG than in MEG was larger than with focal sources. Clinically, SNR maps in a patient explained differential sensitivity of MEG and EEG in detecting epileptic activity. Out results emphasize the benefits of recording MEG and EEG simultaneously. Hum Brain Mapp 30:1077-1086, 2009, (C) 2008 Wiey-Liss. Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:1077 / 1086
页数:10
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]   SAMPLING THEORY FOR NEUROMAGNETIC DETECTOR ARRAYS [J].
AHONEN, AI ;
HAMALAINEN, MS ;
ILMONIEMI, RJ ;
KAJOLA, MJ ;
KNUUTILA, JET ;
SIMOLA, JT ;
VILKMAN, VA .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 1993, 40 (09) :859-869
[2]   Multimodal integration of EEG and MEG data: A simulation study with variable signal-to-noise ratio and number of sensors [J].
Babiloni, F ;
Babiloni, C ;
Carducci, F ;
Romani, GL ;
Rossini, PM ;
Angelone, LM ;
Cincotti, F .
HUMAN BRAIN MAPPING, 2004, 22 (01) :52-62
[3]   MEG and EEG in epilepsy [J].
Barkley, GL ;
Baumgartner, C .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2003, 20 (03) :163-178
[4]   Controversies in clinical neurophysiology. MEG is superior to EEG in the localization of interictal epileptiform activity: Con [J].
Baumgartner, C .
CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2004, 115 (05) :1010-1020
[5]   Neuromagnetic recordings in temporal lobe epilepsy [J].
Baumgartner, C ;
Pataraia, E ;
Lindinger, G ;
Deecke, L .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2000, 17 (02) :177-189
[6]  
Cobb WA, 1983, IFCN RECOMMENDATIONS
[7]   DEMONSTRATION OF USEFUL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAM AND ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM [J].
COHEN, D ;
CUFFIN, BN .
ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY AND CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 1983, 56 (01) :38-51
[9]   MEG VERSUS EEG LOCALIZATION TEST USING IMPLANTED SOURCES IN THE HUMAN BRAIN [J].
COHEN, D ;
CUFFIN, BN ;
YUNOKUCHI, K ;
MANIEWSKI, R ;
PURCELL, C ;
COSGROVE, GR ;
IVES, J ;
KENNEDY, JG ;
SCHOMER, DL .
ANNALS OF NEUROLOGY, 1990, 28 (06) :811-817
[10]   An evaluation of dipole reconstruction accuracy with spherical and realistic head models in MEG [J].
Crouzeix, A ;
Yvert, B ;
Bertrand, O ;
Pernier, J .
CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 1999, 110 (12) :2176-2188