Co-registration of magnetoencephalography with magnetic resonance imaging using bite-bar-based fiducials and surface-matching

OBJECTIVE To introduce a new technique for co-registration of Magnetoencephalography (MEG) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We compare the accuracy of a new bite-bar with fixed fiducials to a previous technique whereby fiducial coils were attached proximal to landmarks on the skull. METHODS A bite-bar with fixed fiducial coils is used to determine the position of the head in the MEG co-ordinate system. Co-registration is performed by a surface-matching technique. The advantage of fixing the coils is that the co-ordinate system is not based upon arbitrary and operator dependent fiducial points that are attached to landmarks (e.g. nasion and the preauricular points), but rather on those that are permanently fixed in relation to the skull. RESULTS As a consequence of minimizing coil movement during digitization, errors in localization of the coils are significantly reduced, as shown by a randomization test. Displacement of the bite-bar caused by removal and repositioning between MEG recordings is minimal ( approximately 0.5 mm), and dipole localization accuracy of a somatosensory mapping paradigm shows a repeatability of approximately 5 mm. The overall accuracy of the new procedure is greatly improved compared to the previous technique. CONCLUSIONS The test-retest reliability and accuracy of target localization with the new design is superior to techniques that incorporate anatomical-based fiducial points or coils placed on the circumference of the head.

[1]  C H Lücking,et al.  Estimation of the accuracy of a surface matching technique for registration of EEG and MRI data. , 1998, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[2]  Cengizhan Ozturk,et al.  Multidimensional Alignment Using the Euclidean Distance Transform , 1997, CVGIP Graph. Model. Image Process..

[3]  B. Neil Cuffin,et al.  Effects of Measurement Errors and Noise on MEG Moving Dipole Inverse Solutions , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[4]  J C de Munck,et al.  The use of an MEG device as 3D digitizer and motion monitoring system. , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  Seppo P. Ahlfors,et al.  Magnetometer Position Indicator for Multichannel MEG , 1989 .

[6]  John S. George,et al.  Three-Dimensional Volumetric Reconstruction for Neuromagnetic Source Localization , 1989 .

[7]  Samuel J. Williamson,et al.  Advances in Biomagnetism , 1990, Springer US.

[8]  K D Singh,et al.  Evaluation of MRI-MEG/EEG co-registration strategies using Monte Carlo simulation. , 1997, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[9]  F. H. Lopes da Silva,et al.  MEG, EEG and the integration with Magnetic Resonance Images , 1989 .

[10]  C. Barillot,et al.  Registration of MEG/EEG data with 3D MRI: Methodology and precision issues , 1996, Brain Topography.

[11]  R. Mohan,et al.  Motion adaptive x-ray therapy: a feasibility study , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  Robert J. Maciunas,et al.  Registration of head CT images to physical space using a weighted combination of points and surfaces [image-guided surgery] , 1998, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[13]  C. Pelizzari,et al.  Accurate Three‐Dimensional Registration of CT, PET, and/or MR Images of the Brain , 1989, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[14]  Jay B. West,et al.  Predicting error in rigid-body point-based registration , 1998, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.