Evaluation and comparison of most prevalent artifact reduction methods for EEG acquired simultaneously with fMRI.

Aleksij Kraljič, Andraž Matkovič, Nina Purg, Jure Demšar, Grega Repovš
{"title":"Evaluation and comparison of most prevalent artifact reduction methods for EEG acquired simultaneously with fMRI.","authors":"Aleksij Kraljič,&nbsp;Andraž Matkovič,&nbsp;Nina Purg,&nbsp;Jure Demšar,&nbsp;Grega Repovš","doi":"10.3389/fnimg.2022.968363","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Multimodal neuroimaging using EEG and fMRI provides deeper insights into brain function by improving the spatial and temporal resolution of the acquired data. However, simultaneous EEG-fMRI inevitably compromises the quality of the EEG and fMRI signals due to the high degree of interaction between the two systems. Fluctuations in the magnetic flux flowing through the participant and the EEG system, whether due to movement within the magnetic field of the scanner or to changes in magnetic field strength, induce electrical potentials in the EEG recordings that mask the much weaker electrical activity of the neuronal populations. A number of different methods have been proposed to reduce MR artifacts. We present an overview of the most commonly used methods and an evaluation of the methods using three sets of diverse EEG data. We limited the evaluation to open-access and easy-to-use methods and a reference signal regression method using a set of six carbon-wire loops (CWL), which allowed evaluation of their added value. The evaluation was performed by comparing EEG signals recorded outside the MRI scanner with artifact-corrected EEG signals recorded simultaneously with fMRI. To quantify and evaluate the quality of artifact reduction methods in terms of the spectral content of the signal, we analyzed changes in oscillatory activity during a resting-state and a finger tapping motor task. The quality of artifact reduction in the time domain was assessed using data collected during a visual stimulation task. In the study we utilized hierarchical Bayesian probabilistic modeling for statistical inference and observed significant differences between the evaluated methods in the success of artifact reduction and associated signal quality in both the frequency and time domains. In particular, the CWL system proved superior to the other methods evaluated in improving spectral contrast in the alpha and beta bands and in recovering visual evoked responses. Based on the results of the evaluation study, we proposed guidelines for selecting the optimal method for MR artifact reduction.</p>","PeriodicalId":73094,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in neuroimaging","volume":"1 ","pages":"968363"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10406266/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in neuroimaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnimg.2022.968363","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Multimodal neuroimaging using EEG and fMRI provides deeper insights into brain function by improving the spatial and temporal resolution of the acquired data. However, simultaneous EEG-fMRI inevitably compromises the quality of the EEG and fMRI signals due to the high degree of interaction between the two systems. Fluctuations in the magnetic flux flowing through the participant and the EEG system, whether due to movement within the magnetic field of the scanner or to changes in magnetic field strength, induce electrical potentials in the EEG recordings that mask the much weaker electrical activity of the neuronal populations. A number of different methods have been proposed to reduce MR artifacts. We present an overview of the most commonly used methods and an evaluation of the methods using three sets of diverse EEG data. We limited the evaluation to open-access and easy-to-use methods and a reference signal regression method using a set of six carbon-wire loops (CWL), which allowed evaluation of their added value. The evaluation was performed by comparing EEG signals recorded outside the MRI scanner with artifact-corrected EEG signals recorded simultaneously with fMRI. To quantify and evaluate the quality of artifact reduction methods in terms of the spectral content of the signal, we analyzed changes in oscillatory activity during a resting-state and a finger tapping motor task. The quality of artifact reduction in the time domain was assessed using data collected during a visual stimulation task. In the study we utilized hierarchical Bayesian probabilistic modeling for statistical inference and observed significant differences between the evaluated methods in the success of artifact reduction and associated signal quality in both the frequency and time domains. In particular, the CWL system proved superior to the other methods evaluated in improving spectral contrast in the alpha and beta bands and in recovering visual evoked responses. Based on the results of the evaluation study, we proposed guidelines for selecting the optimal method for MR artifact reduction.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

与fMRI同时采集的脑电图中最流行的伪影减少方法的评价与比较。
使用EEG和fMRI的多模态神经成像通过提高所获得数据的空间和时间分辨率,可以更深入地了解大脑功能。然而,同时进行EEG-fMRI不可避免地会影响EEG和fMRI信号的质量,因为这两个系统之间的相互作用程度很高。流经参与者和脑电图系统的磁通量波动,无论是由于扫描仪磁场内的运动还是由于磁场强度的变化,都会在脑电图记录中诱发电位,从而掩盖了神经元群的弱得多的电活动。已经提出了许多不同的方法来减少MR伪影。我们提出了最常用的方法的概述和方法的评估使用三组不同的脑电图数据。我们将评估限制在开放获取和易于使用的方法和使用一组6个碳丝环(CWL)的参考信号回归方法,这允许评估其附加价值。通过比较MRI扫描仪外记录的脑电图信号与与fMRI同时记录的伪影校正脑电图信号来进行评估。为了根据信号的频谱内容来量化和评估伪影减少方法的质量,我们分析了静息状态和手指敲击运动任务期间振荡活动的变化。利用视觉刺激任务中收集的数据来评估时域伪影减少的质量。在研究中,我们利用层次贝叶斯概率模型进行统计推断,并观察到评估方法在频率和时间域的伪影减少成功率和相关信号质量方面存在显著差异。特别是,CWL系统在提高α和β波段的光谱对比度和恢复视觉诱发反应方面优于其他方法。基于评估研究的结果,我们提出了选择MR伪影减少的最佳方法的指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信