4.4 Article

Adapted cabling of an EEG cap improves simultaneous measurement of EEG and fMRI at 7T

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE METHODS
Volume 331, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2019.108518

Keywords

EEG; fMRI; 7T; EEG cap; ERP; Oscillations

Funding

  1. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research [176.010.2005.030, 451-12-021]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The combination of EEG and ultra-high-field (7T and above) fMRI holds the promise to relate electrophysiology and hemodynamics with greater signal to noise level and at higher spatial resolutions than conventional field strengths. Technical and safety restrictions have so far resulted in compromises in terms of MRI coil selection, resulting in reduced, signal quality, spatial coverage and resolution in EEG-fMRI studies at 7 T. New method: We adapted a 64-channel MRI-compatible EEG cap so that it could be used with a closed 32-channel MRI head coil thus avoiding several of these compromises. We compare functional and anatomical as well as the EEG quality recorded with this adapted setup with those recorded with a setup that uses an open-ended 8-channel head-coil. Results: Our set-up with the adapted EEG cap inside the closed 32 channel coil resulted in the recording of good quality EEG and (f)MRI data. Both functional and anatomical MRI images show no major effects of the adapted EEG cap on MR signal quality. We demonstrate the ability to compute ERPs and changes in alpha and gamma oscillations from the recorded EEG data. Comparison with existing methods: Compared to MRI recordings with an 8-channel open-ended head-coil, the loss in signal quality of the MRI images related to the adapted EEG cap is considerably reduced. Conclusions: The adaptation of the EEG cap permits the simultaneous recording of good quality whole brain (f) MRI data using a 32 channel receiver coil, while maintaining the quality of the EEG data.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available