SungJun Cho, Mats van Es, Mark Woolrich, Chetan Gohil
{"title":"静态和动态静息态网络的脑电图和脑电图比较。","authors":"SungJun Cho, Mats van Es, Mark Woolrich, Chetan Gohil","doi":"10.1002/hbm.70018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The characterisation of resting-state networks (RSNs) using neuroimaging techniques has significantly contributed to our understanding of the organisation of brain activity. Prior work has demonstrated the electrophysiological basis of RSNs and their dynamic nature, revealing transient activations of brain networks with millisecond timescales. While previous research has confirmed the comparability of RSNs identified by electroencephalography (EEG) to those identified by magnetoencephalography (MEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), most studies have utilised static analysis techniques, ignoring the dynamic nature of brain activity. Often, these studies use high-density EEG systems, which limit their applicability in clinical settings. Addressing these gaps, our research studies RSNs using medium-density EEG systems (61 sensors), comparing both static and dynamic brain network features to those obtained from a high-density MEG system (306 sensors). We assess the qualitative and quantitative comparability of EEG-derived RSNs to those from MEG, including their ability to capture age-related effects, and explore the reproducibility of dynamic RSNs within and across the modalities. Our findings suggest that both MEG and EEG offer comparable static and dynamic network descriptions, albeit with MEG offering some increased sensitivity and reproducibility. Such RSNs and their comparability across the two modalities remained consistent qualitatively but not quantitatively when the data were reconstructed without subject-specific structural MRI images.</p>","PeriodicalId":13019,"journal":{"name":"Human Brain Mapping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hbm.70018","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between EEG and MEG of static and dynamic resting-state networks\",\"authors\":\"SungJun Cho, Mats van Es, Mark Woolrich, Chetan Gohil\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hbm.70018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The characterisation of resting-state networks (RSNs) using neuroimaging techniques has significantly contributed to our understanding of the organisation of brain activity. Prior work has demonstrated the electrophysiological basis of RSNs and their dynamic nature, revealing transient activations of brain networks with millisecond timescales. While previous research has confirmed the comparability of RSNs identified by electroencephalography (EEG) to those identified by magnetoencephalography (MEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), most studies have utilised static analysis techniques, ignoring the dynamic nature of brain activity. Often, these studies use high-density EEG systems, which limit their applicability in clinical settings. Addressing these gaps, our research studies RSNs using medium-density EEG systems (61 sensors), comparing both static and dynamic brain network features to those obtained from a high-density MEG system (306 sensors). We assess the qualitative and quantitative comparability of EEG-derived RSNs to those from MEG, including their ability to capture age-related effects, and explore the reproducibility of dynamic RSNs within and across the modalities. Our findings suggest that both MEG and EEG offer comparable static and dynamic network descriptions, albeit with MEG offering some increased sensitivity and reproducibility. Such RSNs and their comparability across the two modalities remained consistent qualitatively but not quantitatively when the data were reconstructed without subject-specific structural MRI images.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Brain Mapping\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hbm.70018\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Brain Mapping\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.70018\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROIMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Brain Mapping","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.70018","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
利用神经成像技术描述静息态网络(RSN)的特征极大地促进了我们对大脑活动组织的理解。之前的研究已经证明了 RSN 的电生理学基础及其动态性质,揭示了大脑网络以毫秒为单位的瞬时激活。虽然之前的研究已经证实了脑电图(EEG)识别的 RSN 与脑磁图(MEG)和功能磁共振成像(fMRI)识别的 RSN 具有可比性,但大多数研究都采用了静态分析技术,忽略了大脑活动的动态性质。这些研究通常使用高密度脑电图系统,这限制了它们在临床环境中的适用性。为了弥补这些不足,我们的研究使用中等密度脑电图系统(61 个传感器)对 RSN 进行了研究,并将静态和动态脑网络特征与高密度 MEG 系统(306 个传感器)获得的特征进行了比较。我们评估了 EEG 导出的 RSN 与 MEG 导出的 RSN 在定性和定量方面的可比性,包括其捕捉年龄相关效应的能力,并探讨了动态 RSN 在两种模式内部和之间的可重复性。我们的研究结果表明,MEG 和 EEG 都能提供具有可比性的静态和动态网络描述,尽管 MEG 的灵敏度和再现性有所提高。在没有特定受试者的结构磁共振成像图像的情况下重建数据时,这些 RSN 及其在两种模式间的可比性在质上保持一致,但在量上却不一致。
Comparison between EEG and MEG of static and dynamic resting-state networks
The characterisation of resting-state networks (RSNs) using neuroimaging techniques has significantly contributed to our understanding of the organisation of brain activity. Prior work has demonstrated the electrophysiological basis of RSNs and their dynamic nature, revealing transient activations of brain networks with millisecond timescales. While previous research has confirmed the comparability of RSNs identified by electroencephalography (EEG) to those identified by magnetoencephalography (MEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), most studies have utilised static analysis techniques, ignoring the dynamic nature of brain activity. Often, these studies use high-density EEG systems, which limit their applicability in clinical settings. Addressing these gaps, our research studies RSNs using medium-density EEG systems (61 sensors), comparing both static and dynamic brain network features to those obtained from a high-density MEG system (306 sensors). We assess the qualitative and quantitative comparability of EEG-derived RSNs to those from MEG, including their ability to capture age-related effects, and explore the reproducibility of dynamic RSNs within and across the modalities. Our findings suggest that both MEG and EEG offer comparable static and dynamic network descriptions, albeit with MEG offering some increased sensitivity and reproducibility. Such RSNs and their comparability across the two modalities remained consistent qualitatively but not quantitatively when the data were reconstructed without subject-specific structural MRI images.
期刊介绍:
Human Brain Mapping publishes peer-reviewed basic, clinical, technical, and theoretical research in the interdisciplinary and rapidly expanding field of human brain mapping. The journal features research derived from non-invasive brain imaging modalities used to explore the spatial and temporal organization of the neural systems supporting human behavior. Imaging modalities of interest include positron emission tomography, event-related potentials, electro-and magnetoencephalography, magnetic resonance imaging, and single-photon emission tomography. Brain mapping research in both normal and clinical populations is encouraged.
Article formats include Research Articles, Review Articles, Clinical Case Studies, and Technique, as well as Technological Developments, Theoretical Articles, and Synthetic Reviews. Technical advances, such as novel brain imaging methods, analyses for detecting or localizing neural activity, synergistic uses of multiple imaging modalities, and strategies for the design of behavioral paradigms and neural-systems modeling are of particular interest. The journal endorses the propagation of methodological standards and encourages database development in the field of human brain mapping.