Sensitivity of MEG and EEG to Source Orientation

An important difference between magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electroencephalography (EEG) is that MEG is insensitive to radially oriented sources. We quantified computationally the dependency of MEG and EEG on the source orientation using a forward model with realistic tissue boundaries. Similar to the simpler case of a spherical head model, in which MEG cannot see radial sources at all, for most cortical locations there was a source orientation to which MEG was insensitive. The median value for the ratio of the signal magnitude for the source orientation of the lowest and the highest sensitivity was 0.06 for MEG and 0.63 for EEG. The difference in the sensitivity to the source orientation is expected to contribute to systematic differences in the signal-to-noise ratio between MEG and EEG.

[1]  Richard McFee,et al.  Theory of Magnetic Detection of the Heart's Electrical Activity , 1965 .

[2]  J. Haueisen,et al.  Role of Soft Bone, CSF and Gray Matter in EEG Simulations , 2003, Brain Topography.

[3]  W. Freeman,et al.  Combining fMRI with EEG and MEG in order to relate patterns of brain activity to cognition. , 2009, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[4]  David Cohen,et al.  EEG versus MEG localization accuracy: Theory and experiment , 2005, Brain Topography.

[5]  P. G. Larsson,et al.  The value of multichannel MEG and EEG in the presurgical evaluation of 70 epilepsy patients , 2006, Epilepsy Research.

[6]  E. Halgren,et al.  Head position in the MEG helmet affects the sensitivity to anterior sources. , 2004, Neurology & clinical neurophysiology : NCN.

[7]  C D Tesche,et al.  Non-invasive detection of neuronal population activity in human hippocampus. , 1996, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[8]  M. Fuchs,et al.  Boundary element method volume conductor models for EEG source reconstruction , 2001, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[9]  Geertjan Huiskamp,et al.  Regional Differences in the Sensitivity of MEG for Interictal Spikes in Epilepsy , 2010, Brain Topography.

[10]  D. Cohen,et al.  Dependence of the MEG on dipole orientation in the rabbit head. , 1988, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[11]  J. Mäkelä,et al.  Sources of auditory brainstem responses revisited: Contribution by magnetoencephalography , 2009, Human brain mapping.

[12]  L. T. Ho,et al.  Magnetoencephalographic yield of interictal spikes in temporal lobe epilepsy Comparison with scalp EEG recordings , 2003, NeuroImage.

[13]  G. R. Barnes,et al.  A Quantitative Assessment of the Sensitivity of Whole-Head MEG to Activity in the Adult Human Cortex , 2002, NeuroImage.

[14]  D. Cohen,et al.  Demonstration of useful differences between magnetoencephalogram and electroencephalogram. , 1983, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[15]  J. Haueisen,et al.  The Influence of Brain Tissue Anisotropy on Human EEG and MEG , 2002, NeuroImage.

[16]  Thomas Elbert,et al.  Differential outcomes from magneto- and electroencephalography for the analysis of human cognition , 1997, Neuroscience Letters.

[17]  L. Geddes,et al.  The specific resistance of biological material—A compendium of data for the biomedical engineer and physiologist , 1967, Medical and biological engineering.

[18]  R. Ilmoniemi,et al.  Magnetoencephalography-theory, instrumentation, and applications to noninvasive studies of the working human brain , 1993 .

[19]  J. Pernier,et al.  Improved dipole localization using local mesh refinement of realistic head geometries: an EEG simulation study. , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[20]  R. Leahy,et al.  EEG and MEG: forward solutions for inverse methods , 1999, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[21]  R M Leahy,et al.  A sensor-weighted overlapping-sphere head model and exhaustive head model comparison for MEG. , 1999, Physics in medicine and biology.

[22]  A. Dale,et al.  Cortical Surface-Based Analysis II: Inflation, Flattening, and a Surface-Based Coordinate System , 1999, NeuroImage.

[23]  Xavier Tricoche,et al.  Influence of tissue conductivity anisotropy on EEG/MEG field and return current computation in a realistic head model: A simulation and visualization study using high-resolution finite element modeling , 2006, NeuroImage.

[24]  M. Hämäläinen,et al.  Realistic conductivity geometry model of the human head for interpretation of neuromagnetic data , 1989, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[25]  Richard M. Leahy,et al.  Electromagnetic brain mapping , 2001, IEEE Signal Process. Mag..

[26]  Jorge J Riera,et al.  A theoretical formulation of the electrophysiological inverse problem on the sphere , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[27]  Jeffrey L. Elman,et al.  A novel integrated MEG and EEG analysis method for dipolar sources , 2007, NeuroImage.

[28]  R Salmelin,et al.  The 3D topography of MEG source localization accuracy: effects of conductor model and noise , 2003, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[29]  John W Belliveau,et al.  Monte Carlo simulation studies of EEG and MEG localization accuracy , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[30]  E. Halgren,et al.  Cancellation of EEG and MEG signals generated by extended and distributed sources , 2009, Human brain mapping.

[31]  L. Vaina,et al.  Mapping the signal‐to‐noise‐ratios of cortical sources in magnetoencephalography and electroencephalography , 2009, Human brain mapping.

[32]  D. Geselowitz,et al.  Model studies of the magnetocardiogram. , 1973, Biophysical journal.

[33]  Anders M. Dale,et al.  Cortical Surface-Based Analysis I. Segmentation and Surface Reconstruction , 1999, NeuroImage.

[34]  B.N. Cuffin,et al.  Effects of head shape on EEGs and MEGs , 1990, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[35]  J. Haueisen,et al.  On the influence of volume currents and extended sources on neuromagnetic fields: A simulation study , 1995, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[36]  Jens Haueisen,et al.  Dipole models for the EEG and MEG , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[37]  Arent de Jongh,et al.  Differences in MEG/EEG Epileptic Spike Yields Explained by Regional Differences in Signal-to-Noise Ratios , 2005, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.