Cancellation of EEG and MEG Signals Generated by Extended and Distributed Sources

被引:98
作者
Ahlfors, Seppo P. [1 ,2 ]
Han, Jooman [1 ]
Lin, Fa-Hsuan [1 ,3 ]
Witzel, Thomas [1 ,2 ]
Belliveau, John W. [1 ,2 ]
Haemaelaeinen, Matti S. [1 ,2 ]
Halgren, Eric [4 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Sch Med, Athinoula A Martinos Ctr Biomed Imaging, Charlestown, MA USA
[2] MIT, Harvard Mit Div Hlth Sci & Technol, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
[3] Natl Taiwan Univ, Inst Biomed Engn, Taipei 10764, Taiwan
[4] Univ Calif San Diego, Dept Radiol, San Diego, CA 92103 USA
关键词
magnetoencephalography; electroencephalography; forward model; inverse problem; cerebral cortex; cortical patch analysis; ANTIDROMIC CORTICAL RESPONSE; EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS; SURFACE-BASED ANALYSIS; TO-NOISE-RATIOS; MAGNETIC-FIELDS; BRAIN ACTIVITY; RE-ANALYSIS; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; LOCALIZATION;
D O I
10.1002/hbm.20851
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Extracranial patterns of scalp potentials and magnetic fields, as measured with electro- and magnetoencephalography (EEG, MEG), are spatially widespread even when the underlying source in the brain is focal. Therefore, loss in signal magnitude due to cancellation is expected when multiple brain regions are simultaneously active. We characterized these cancellation effects in EEG and MEG using a forward model with sources constrained on an anatomically accurate reconstruction of the cortical surface. Prominent cancellation was found for both EEG and MEG in the case of multiple randomly distributed source dipoles, even when the number of simultaneous dipoles was small. Substantial cancellation occurred also for locally extended patches of simulated activity, when the patches extended to opposite walls of sulci and gyri. For large patches, a difference between EEG and MEG cancellation was seen, presumably due to selective cancellation of tangentially vs. radially oriented sources. Cancellation effects can be of importance when electrophysiological data are related to hemo-dynamic measures. Furthermore, the selective cancellation may be used to explain some observed differences between EEG and MEG in terms of focal vs. widespread cortical activity. Hum Brain Mapp 31:140-149, 2010. (C) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:140 / 149
页数:10
相关论文
共 61 条
[11]   NEURAL MECHANISMS UNDERLYING BRAIN WAVES - FROM NEURAL MEMBRANES TO NETWORKS [J].
DASILVA, FL .
ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY AND CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 1991, 79 (02) :81-93
[12]   Differences in MEG/EEG epileptic spike yields explained by regional differences in signal-to-noise ratios [J].
de Jongh, A ;
de Munck, JC ;
Gonçalves, SI ;
Ossenblok, P .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2005, 22 (02) :153-158
[13]   A RANDOM DIPOLE MODEL FOR SPONTANEOUS BRAIN ACTIVITY [J].
DEMUNCK, JC ;
VIJN, PCM ;
DASILVA, FHL .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 1992, 39 (08) :791-804
[14]  
DENO RL, 1947, STUDIES ROCKEFELLER, V132, pCH16
[15]   Differential outcomes from magneto- and electroencephalography for the analysis of human cognition [J].
Eulitz, C ;
Eulitz, H ;
Elbert, T .
NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS, 1997, 227 (03) :185-188
[16]   Cortical surface-based analysis - II: Inflation, flattening, and a surface-based coordinate system [J].
Fischl, B ;
Sereno, MI ;
Dale, AM .
NEUROIMAGE, 1999, 9 (02) :195-207
[17]   Combining fMRI with EEG and MEG in order to relate patterns of brain activity to cognition [J].
Freeman, Walter J. ;
Ahlfors, Seppo P. ;
Menon, Vinod .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY, 2009, 73 (01) :43-52
[18]   Spatial spectra of scalp EEG and EMG from awake humans [J].
Freeman, WJ ;
Holmes, MD ;
Burke, BC ;
Vanhatalo, S .
CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2003, 114 (06) :1053-1068
[19]   Linear and nonlinear current density reconstructions [J].
Fuchs, M ;
Wagner, M ;
Köhler, T ;
Wischmann, HA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 1999, 16 (03) :267-295
[20]   Boundary element method volume conductor models for EEG source reconstruction [J].
Fuchs, M ;
Wagner, M ;
Kastner, J .
CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2001, 112 (08) :1400-1407