4.6 Article

Influence of High Pass Filter Settings on Motor Evoked Potentials

Journal

FRONTIERS IN NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 15, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2021.665258

Keywords

transcramial magnetic stimulation; motor evoked potential; high pass filter; notch filter; artifacts

Categories

Funding

  1. Heinrich Heine University Dusseldorf

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, MEP amplitudes were significantly higher at 10 and 20 Hz with high pass filter settings compared to 100 Hz, but SNR did not differ among HPF settings. An active notch filter significantly improved SNR, indicating that higher HPF above 50 Hz may reduce noise and notch filter usage may enhance SNR.
Objective Motor evoked potentials (MEP), obtained by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) are a common tool in clinical research and diagnostic. Nevertheless, reports regarding the influence of filter settings on MEP are sparse. Here, we compared MEP amplitudes and signal to noise ratio (SNR) using multiple high pass filter (HPF) and notch filter settings. Materials and Methods Twenty healthy subjects were enrolled in the study. Recruitment curves were obtained with HPF settings varied at 10, 20, 50, and 100 Hz. The four HPF settings were tested both with and without 50 Hz active notch filter. Low pass filter was kept constant at 5 kHz. Results MEP amplitudes with HPF at 10 and 20 Hz were significantly higher than at 100 Hz, regardless of the notch filter. However, SNR did not differ among HPF settings. An active notch filter significantly improved SNR. Conclusion The reduction in MEP amplitudes with HPF above 20 Hz may be due to noise reduction, since the different HPF conditions did not alter SNR. Thus, higher HPF above 50 Hz may be an option to reduce noise, the use of a notch filter may even improve SNR. Significance Our findings are relevant for the selection of filter settings and might be of importance to any researcher who utilizes TMS-MEP.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available