Mapping functional connectivity in patients with brain lesions

Annals of Neurology

Volumn 63, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 193-203

  Guggisberg, Adrian G ^a,b   Honma, Susanne M ^a   Findlay, Anne M ^a   Dalal, Sarang S ^a   Kirsch, Heidi E ^a,c   Berger, Mitchel S ^a   Nagarajan, Srikantan S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BRAIN CORTEX; BRAIN DAMAGE; BRAIN MAPPING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROL GROUP; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; FEMALE; FILTRATION; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MALE; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOMATOSENSORY CORTEX; TUMOR;

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHMS; BRAIN MAPPING; BRAIN NEOPLASMS; CEREBRAL CORTEX; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEURAL PATHWAYS; NEUROSURGICAL PROCEDURES; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREOPERATIVE CARE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 40449138801     PISSN: 03645134     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ana.21224     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Ojemann JG, Miller JW, Silbergeld DL. Preserved function in brain invaded by tumor. Neurosurgery 1996;39:253-258.
2. Berger MS, Kincaid J, Ojemann GA, et al. Brain mapping techniques to maximize resection, safety, and seizure control in children with brain tumors. Neurosurgery 1989;25:786-792.
3. Mueller WM, Yetkin FZ, Hammeke TA, et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging mapping of the motor cortex in patients with cerebral tumors. Neurosurgery 1996;39:515-520.
4. Fandino J, Kollias SS, Wieser HG, et al. Intraoperative validation of functional magnetic resonance imaging and cortical reorganization patterns in patients with brain tumors involving the primary motor cortex. J Neurosurg 1999;91:238-250.
5. Roberts TP, Zusman E, McDermott M, et al. Correlation of functional magnetic source imaging with intraoperative cortical stimulation in neurosurgical patients. J Image Guid Surg 1995; 1:339-347.
6. Ganslandt O, Fahlbusch R, Nimsky C, et al. Functional neuronavigation with magnetoencephalography: outcome in 50 patients with lesions around the motor cortex. J Neurosurg 1999; 91:73-79.
7. Alberstone CD, Skirboll SL, Benzel EC, et al. Magnetic source imaging and brain surgery: presurgical and intraoperative planning in 26 patients. J Neurosurg 2000;92:79-90.
8. Schiffbauer H, Berger MS, Ferrari P, et al. Preoperative magnetic source imaging for brain tumor surgery: a quantitative comparison with intraoperative sensory and motor mapping. Neurosurg Focus 2003;15:E7.
9. Harmony T, Marosi E, Fernandez T, et al. EEG coherences in patients with brain lesions. Int J Neurosci 1994;74:203-226.
10. Towle VL, Syed I, Berger C, et al. Identification of the sensory/ motor area and pathologic regions using ECoG coherence. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1998;106:30-39.
11. Quigley M, Cordes D, Wendt G, et al. Effect of focal and nonfocal cerebral lesions on functional connectivity studied with MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001;22:294-300.
12. Bartolomei F, Bosma I, Klein M, et al. How do brain tumors alter functional connectivity? A magnetoencephalography study. Ann Neurol 2006;59:128-138.
13. Bartolomei F, Bosma I, Klein M, et al. Disturbed functional connectivity in brain tumour patients: evaluation by graph analysis of synchronization matrices. Clin Neurophysiol 2006;117: 2039-2049.
14. Van Veen BD, van DW, Yuchtman M, et al. Localization of brain electrical activity via linearly constrained minimum variance spatial filtering. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1997;44: 867-880.
15. Vrba J, Robinson SE. Signal processing in magnetoencephalography. Methods 2001;25:249-271.
16. Sekihara K, Nagarajan SS, Poeppel D, et al. Reconstructing spatio-temporal activities of neural sources using an MEG vector beamformer technique. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2001;48: 760-771.
17. Sekihara K, Nagarajan SS, Poeppel D, et al. Performance of an MEG adaptive-beamformer technique in the presence of correlated neural activities: effects on signal intensity and time-course estimates. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2002;49:1534-1546.
18. Sekihara K, Nagarajan SS, Poeppel D, et al. Performance of an MEG adaptive-beamformer source reconstruction technique in the presence of additive low-rank interference. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2004;51:90-99.
19. Sekihara K, Sahani M, Nagarajan SS. Localization bias and spatial resolution of adaptive and non-adaptive spatial filters for MEG source reconstruction. Neuroimage 2005;25:1056-1067.
20. Nolte G, Bai O, Wheaton L, et al. Identifying true brain interaction from EEG data using the imaginary part of coherency. Clin Neurophysiol 2004;115:2292-2307.
21. Lopes da Silva FH, van Lierop TH, Schrijer CF, et al. Organization of thalamic and cortical alpha rhythms: spectra and coherences. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1973;35: 627-639.
22. Lachaux JP, Rodriguez E, Martinerie J, et al. Measuring phase synchrony in brain signals. Hum Brain Mapp 1999;8:194-208.
23. Le Van QM, Foucher J, Lachaux J, et al. Comparison of Hilbert transform and wavelet methods for the analysis of neuronal synchrony. J Neurosci Methods 2001;111:83-98.
24. Stam CJ, Breakspear M, van Cappellen van Walsum AM, et al. Nonlinear synchronization in EEG and whole-head MEG recordings of healthy subjects. Hum Brain Mapp 2003;19:63-78.
25. Fein G, Raz J, Brown FF, et al. Common reference coherence data are confounded by power and phase effects. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1988;69:581-584.
26. Nunez PL, Srinivasan R, Westdorp AF, et al. EEG coherency. I: Statistics, reference electrode, volume conduction, Laplacians, cortical imaging, and interpretation at multiple scales. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1997;103:499-515.
27. Gross J, Kujala J, Hamalainen M, et al. Dynamic imaging of coherent sources: studying neural interactions in the human brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001;98:694-699.
28. Hadjipapas A, Hillebrand A, Holliday IE, et al. Assessing interactions of linear and nonlinear neuronal sources using MEG beamformers: a proof of concept. Clin Neurophysiol 2005;116: 1300-1313.
29. Smith SM. Fast robust automated brain extraction. Hum Brain Mapp 2002;17:143-155.
30. Nakasato N, Kumabe T, Kanno A, et al. Neuromagnetic evaluation of cortical auditory function in patients with temporal lobe tumors. J Neurosurg 1997;86:610-618.
31. Keles GE, Lundin DA, Lamborn KR, et al. Intraoperative subcortical stimulation mapping for hemispherical perirolandic gliomas located within or adjacent to the descending motor pathways: evaluation of morbidity and assessment of functional outcome in 294 patients. J Neurosurg 2004;100: 369-375.
32. Bassett DS, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Achard S, et al. Adaptive reconfiguration of fractal small-world human brain functional networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006;103: 19518-19523.
33. Fox MD, Snyder AZ, Vincent JL, et al. The human brain is intrinsically organized into dynamic, anticorrelated functional networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:9673-9678.
34. Achard S, Salvador R, Whitcher B, et al. A resilient, low-frequency, small-world human brain functional network with highly connected association cortical hubs. J Neurosci 2006;26: 63-72.
35. Pfurtscheller G. Event-related synchronization (ERS): an electrophysiological correlate of cortical areas at rest. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1992;83:62-69.
36. Tiihonen J, Kajola M, Hari R. Magnetic mu rhythm in man. Neuroscience 1989;32:793-800.
37. Lehtela L, Salmelin R, Hari R. Evidence for reactive magnetic 10-Hz rhythm in the human auditory cortex. Neurosci Lett 1997;222:111-114.
38. Stam CJ, Nolte G, Daffertshofer A. Phase lag index: assessment of functional connectivity from multi channel EEG and MEG with diminished bias from common sources. Hum Brain Mapp (in press).