A digital technique for stimulus artifact reduction

Blogg, T.; Reid, W. Darlene

doi:10.1016/0013-4694(90)90005-5

Cited by 17 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different approaches for artifact removal can be found in the literature, ranging from the use of linear and nonlinear filters (Whittington et al 2003(Whittington et al , 2005Sennels et al 1997;Parsa et al 1998;Gnadt et al 2003;Liang and Lin 2002) to the subtraction of artifact templates generated by a variety of methods (Hashimoto et al 2002;Lin et al 1996;Lin and McCallum 1998;Wagenaar and Potter 2002;Litvak et al 2003;Yuwaraj and Kunov 1995;Grieve et al 2000;Blogg and Reid 1990). For multielectrode recordings with a high number of recording electrodes, blind source separation, independent component analysis, and optimized differential reference techniques allow for the spatial localization of artifact sources and potentials (Gilley et al 2006; Castañeda-Villa and James , which makes it possible to select electrodes that are less affected by artifacts and to remove artifact components from these recordings.…”

Section: Artifact Reductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrically Evoked Auditory Steady State Responses in Cochlear Implant Users

Hofmann

Wouters

2009

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory steady state responses are neural potentials in response to repeated auditory stimuli. This study shows that electrically evoked auditory steady state responses (EASSRs) to low-rate pulse trains can be reliably recorded by electrodes placed on the scalp of a cochlear implant (CI) user and separated from the artifacts generated by the electrical stimulation. Response properties are described, and the predictive value of EASSRs for behaviorally hearing thresholds is analyzed. For six users of a Cochlear Nucleus CI, EASSRs to symmetric biphasic pulse trains with rates between 35 and 47 Hz were recorded with seven scalp electrodes. The influence of various stimulus parameters was assessed: pulse rate, stimulus intensity, monopolar or bipolar stimulation mode, and presentation of either one pulse train on one electrode or interleaved pulse trains with different pulse rates on multiple electrodes. To compensate for the electrical artifacts caused by the stimulus pulses and radio frequency transmission, different methods of artifact reduction were employed. The validity of the recorded responses was confirmed by recording on-off responses, determination of response latency across the measured pulse rates, and comparison of amplitude growth of stimulus artifact and response amplitude. For stimulation in the 40 Hz range, response latencies of 35.6 ms (SD = 5.3 ms) were obtained. Responses to multiple simultaneous stimuli on different electrodes can be evoked, and the electrophysiological thresholds determined from EASSR amplitude growth in the 40 Hz range correlate well with behaviorally determined threshold levels for pulse rates of 41 Hz.

show abstract

Section: Artifact Reductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrically Evoked Auditory Steady State Responses in Cochlear Implant Users

Hofmann

Wouters

2009

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Different methods have been developed including the most commonly used blanking techniques and more complicated methods (e.g. based on template subtraction, digital filtering, multi-channel signal processing) which can reduce stimulus artifact while leaving the useful signal relatively intact (Al-ani et al, 2011; Blogg and Reid, 1990; Boudreau et al, 2004; Brown et al, 2008; Erez et al, 2010; Grieve et al, 2000; Hashimoto et al, 2002; Heffer and Fallon, 2008; Kent and Grill, 2012; Lu et al, 2012; Mahmud et al, 2012; McGill et al, 1982; O’Keeffe et al, 2001; Sadeghian et al, 2010; Taulu and Hari, 2009; Wagenaar and Potter, 2002; Wichmann, 2000; Wichmann and Devergnas, 2011). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suppression of stimulus artifact contaminating electrically evoked electromyography

Liu

et al. 2014

NRE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Electrical stimulation of muscle or nerve is a very useful technique for understanding of muscle activity and its pathological changes for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. During electrical stimulation of a muscle, the recorded M wave is often contaminated by a stimulus artifact. The stimulus artifact must be removed for appropriate analysis and interpretation of M waves. Objectives The objective of this study was to develop a novel software based method to remove stimulus artifacts contaminating or superimposing with electrically evoked surface electromyography (EMG) or M wave signals. Methods The multiple stage method uses a series of signal processing techniques, including highlighting and detection of stimulus artifacts using the Savitzky-Golay filtering, estimation of the artifact contaminated region with the Otsu thresholding, and reconstruction of such region using signal interpolation and smoothing. The developed method was tested using M wave signals recorded from biceps brachii muscles by a linear surface electrode array. To evaluate the performance, a series of semi-synthetic signals were constructed from clean M wave and stimulus artifact recordings with different degrees of overlap between them. Results The effectiveness of the developed method was quantified by a significant increase in correlation coefficient and a significant decrease in root mean square error between the clean M wave and the reconstructed M wave, compared with those between the clean M wave and the originally contaminated signal. The validity of the developed method was also demonstrated when tested on each channel’s M wave recording using the linear electrode array. Conclusions The developed method can suppress stimulus artifacts contaminating M wave recordings.

show abstract

“…These methods mainly include SA template subtraction (Blogg and Reid, 1990;Hashimoto et al, 2002;Litvak et al, 2001;McGill et al, 1982;Miller et al, 1999;Wichmann, 2000), hybrid methods combining SA blanking and SA template subtraction (Montgomery et al, 2005) and removal of SA identified by local curve fitting algorithms (Wagenaar and Potter, 2002). Generating an accurate reference waveform faithfully representing the SA, is the main focus of research in subtraction techniques and is accomplished by various methods (Wagenaar and Potter, 2002;Wichmann, 2000) successfully optimising the fit of SA template to each SA event to overcome SA waveform variations.…”

Section: Sa Subtractionmentioning

confidence: 99%