» Articles » PMID: 32853593

Algorithmic Localization of High-density EEG Electrode Positions Using Motion Capture

Overview
Specialty Neurology
Date 2020 Aug 28
PMID 32853593
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Accurate source localization from electroencephalography (EEG) requires electrode co-registration to brain anatomy, a process that depends on precise measurement of 3D scalp locations. Stylus digitizers and camera-based scanners for such measurements require the subject to remain still and therefore are not ideal for young children or those with movement disorders.

New Method: Motion capture accurately measures electrode position in one frame but marker placement adds significant setup time, particularly in high-density EEG. We developed an algorithm, named MoLo and implemented as an open-source MATLAB toolbox, to compute 3D electrode coordinates from a subset of positions measured in motion capture using spline interpolation. Algorithm accuracy was evaluated across 5 different-sized head models.

Results: MoLo interpolation reduced setup time by approximately 10 min for 64-channel EEG. Mean electrode interpolation error was 2.95 ± 1.3 mm (range: 0.38-7.98 mm). Source localization errors with interpolated compared to true electrode locations were below 1 mm and 0.1 mm in 75 % and 35 % of dipoles, respectively.

Comparison With Existing Methods: MoLo location accuracy is comparable to stylus digitizers and camera-scanners, common in clinical research. The MoLo algorithm could be deployed with other tools beyond motion capture, e.g., a stylus, to extract high-density EEG electrode locations from a subset of measured positions. The algorithm is particularly useful for research involving young children and others who cannot remain still for extended time periods.

Conclusions: Electrode position and source localization errors with MoLo are similar to other modalities supporting its use to measure high-density EEG electrode positions in research and clinical settings.

Citing Articles

Effects of individualized brain anatomies and EEG electrode positions on inferred activity of the primary auditory cortex.

Ignatiadis K, Barumerli R, Toth B, Baumgartner R Front Neuroinform. 2022; 16:970372.

PMID: 36313125 PMC: 9606706. DOI: 10.3389/fninf.2022.970372.

References
1.
Taberna G, Marino M, Ganzetti M, Mantini D . Spatial localization of EEG electrodes using 3D scanning. J Neural Eng. 2019; 16(2):026020. DOI: 10.1088/1741-2552/aafdd1. View

2.
Reis P, Lochmann M . Using a motion capture system for spatial localization of EEG electrodes. Front Neurosci. 2015; 9:130. PMC: 4403350. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2015.00130. View

3.
Dalal S, Rampp S, Willomitzer F, Ettl S . Consequences of EEG electrode position error on ultimate beamformer source reconstruction performance. Front Neurosci. 2014; 8:42. PMC: 3949288. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2014.00042. View

4.
Oostenveld R, Praamstra P . The five percent electrode system for high-resolution EEG and ERP measurements. Clin Neurophysiol. 2001; 112(4):713-9. DOI: 10.1016/s1388-2457(00)00527-7. View

5.
Koessler L, Cecchin T, Caspary O, Benhadid A, Vespignani H, Maillard L . EEG-MRI co-registration and sensor labeling using a 3D laser scanner. Ann Biomed Eng. 2010; 39(3):983-95. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-010-0230-0. View