Minimum-norm cortical source estimation in layered head models is robust against skull conductivity error

NeuroImage

Volumn 81, Issue , 2013, Pages 265-272

  Stenroos, Matti ^a,b   Hauk, Olaf ^a  

^a MRC COGNITION AND BRAIN SCIENCES UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^b AALTO UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Electroencephalography; Inverse problem; Magnetoencephalography; Minimum norm estimation; Skull conductivity

Indexed keywords

AMPLITUDE MODULATION; ANATOMIC LANDMARK; ARTICLE; BRAIN CORTEX; BRAIN FUNCTION; BRAIN REGION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIPOLE; ELECTRIC CONDUCTIVITY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NEUROANATOMY; NEUROIMAGING; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SKULL; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; TISSUE DISTRIBUTION; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ELECTRIC CONDUCTIVITY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; MODELS, THEORETICAL; SKULL;

EID: 84878683760     PISSN: 10538119     EISSN: 10959572     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.086     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Akhtari M., Bryant H.C., Mamelak A.N., Flynn E.R., Heller L., Shih J.J., Mandelkern M., Matlachov A., Ranken D.M., Best E.D., DiMauro M.A., Lee R.R., Sutherling W.W. Conductivities of three-layer live human skull. Brain Topogr. 2002, 14(3):151-167.
2. Baillet S., Mosher J.C., Leahy R.M. Electromagnetic brain mapping. IEEE Signal Proc. Mag. 2001, 18(6):14-30.
3. Chen F.M., Hallez H., Staelens S. Influence of skull conductivity perturbations on EEG dipole source analysis. Med. Phys. 2010, 37(8):4475-4484.
4. Crevecoeur G., Restrepo V.M., Staelens S. Subspace electrode selection methodology for the reduction of the effect of uncertain conductivity values in the EEG dipole localization: a simulation study using a patient-specific head model. Phys. Med. Biol. 2012, 57(7):1963-1986.
5. Dale A.M., Sereno M.I. Improved localization of cortical activity by combining EEG and MEG with MRI cortical surface reconstruction - a linear approach. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 1993, 5(2):162-176.
6. Dale A.M., Fischl B., Sereno M.I. Cortical surface-based analysis - I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction. Neuroimage 1999, 9(2):179-194.
7. Dannhauer M., Lanfer B., Wolters C.H., Knösche T.R. Modeling of the human skull in EEG source analysis. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2011, 32(9):1383-1399.
8. Grave de Peralta Menendez R., Hauk O., Gonzalez Andino S., Vogt H., Michel C. Linear inverse solutions with optimal resolution kernels applied to electromagnetic tomography. Hum. Brain Mapp. 1997, 5(6):454-467.
9. Fischl B. FreeSurfer. Neuroimage 2012, 62(2):774-781.
10. Fischl B., Sereno M.I., Dale A.M. Cortical surface-based analysis - II: inflation, flattening, and a surface-based coordinate system. Neuroimage 1999, 9(2):195-207.
11. Fuchs M., Wagner M., Kohler T., Wischmann H.A. Linear and nonlinear current density reconstructions. J. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1999, 16(3):267-295.
12. Hämäläinen M.S. MNE Software User's Guide 2009, Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Charlestown, MGH/HMS/MIT Athinoula A.
13. Hämäläinen M.S., Ilmoniemi R.J. Interpreting measured magnetic fields of the brain: minimum norm estimates of current distributions. Technical Report TKK-F-A559 1984, Helsinki University of Technology.
14. Hämäläinen M.S., Ilmoniemi R.J. Interpreting magnetic fields of the brain: minimum norm estimates. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 1994, 32(1):35-42.
15. Hämäläinen M.S., Hari R., Ilmoniemi R.J., Knuutila J., Lounasmaa O.V. Magnetoencephalography - theory, instrumentation, and applications to noninvasive studies of the working human brain. Rev. Mod. Phys. 1993, 65(2):413-497.
16. Haueisen J., Ramon C., Eiselt M., Brauer H., Nowak H. Influence of tissue resistivities on neuromagnetic fields and electric potentials studied with a finite element model of the head. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 1997, 44(8):727-735.
17. Hauk O., Wakeman D.G., Henson R. Comparison of noise-normalized minimum norm estimates for MEG analysis using multiple resolution metrics. Neuroimage 2011, 54(3):1966-1974.
18. Huiskamp G., Vroeijenstijn M., van Dijk R., Wieneke G., van Huffelen A.C. The need for correct realistic geometry in the inverse EEG problem. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 1999, 46(11):1281-1287.
19. Lai Y., van Drongelen W., Ding L., Hecox K.E., Towle V.L., Frim D.M., He B. Estimation of in vivo human brain-to-skull conductivity ratio from simultaneous extra- and intra-cranial electrical potential recordings. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2005, 116(2):456-465.
20. Lanfer B., Scherg M., Dannhauer M., Knosche T.R., Burger M., Wolters C.H. Influences of skull segmentation inaccuracies on EEG source analysis. Neuroimage 2012, 62(1):418-431.
21. Lin F.H., Belliveau J.W., Dale A.M., Hämäläinen M.S. Distributed current estimates using cortical orientation constraints. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2006, 27(1):1-13.
22. Lin F.H., Witzel T., Ahlfors S.P., Stufflebeam S.M., Belliveau J.W., Hämaläinen M.S. Assessing and improving the spatial accuracy in MEG source localization by depth-weighted minimum-norm estimates. Neuroimage 2006, 31(1):160-171.
23. Liu A.K., Dale A.M., Belliveau J.W. Monte Carlo simulation studies of EEG and MEG localization accuracy. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2002, 16(1):47-62.
24. Menke W. Geophysical Data Analysis: Discrete Inverse Theory 1989, Academic Press Inc., San Diego.
25. Molins A., Stufflebeam S.M., Brown E.N., Hämäläinen M.S. Quantification of the benefit from integrating MEG and EEG data in minimum l2-norm estimation. Neuroimage 2008, 42(3):1069-1077.
26. Oostendorp T.F., Delbeke J., Stegeman D.F. The conductivity of the human skull: results of in vivo and in vitro measurements. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2000, 47(11):1487-1492.
27. Segonne F., Dale A.M., Busa E., Glessner M., Salat D., Hahn H.K., Fischl B. A hybrid approach to the skull stripping problem in MRI. Neuroimage 2004, 22(3):1060-1075.
28. Steinstraeter O., Sillekens S., Junghoefer M., Burger M., Wolters C.H. Sensitivity of beamformer source analysis to deficiencies in forward modeling. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2010, 31(12):1907-1927.
29. Stenroos M., Sarvas J. Bioelectromagnetic forward problem: isolated source approach revis(it)ed. Phys. Med. Biol. 2012, 57(11):3517-3535.
30. Vallaghe S., Clerc M. A global sensitivity analysis of three- and four-layer EEG conductivity models. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2009, 56(4):988-995.
31. Vanrumste B., Van Hoey G., Van de Walle R., D'Have M., Lemahieu I., Boon P. Dipole location errors in electroencephalogram source analysis due to volume conductor model errors. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 2000, 38(5):528-534.
32. Zhang Y., van Drongelen W., He B. Estimation of in vivo brain-to-skull conductivity ratio in humans. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 89(22):223903-2239033.