2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) 2015
DOI: 10.1109/embc.2015.7319994
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Brain activation profiles in mTBI: Evidence from combined resting-state EEG and MEG activity

Abstract: In this study, we compared the brain activation profiles obtained from resting state Electroencephalographic (EEG) and Magnetoencephalographic (MEG) activity in six mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) patients and five orthopedic controls, using power spectral density (PSD) analysis. We first estimated intracranial dipolar EEG/MEG sources on a dense grid on the cortical surface and then projected these sources on a standardized atlas with 68 regions of interest (ROIs). Averaging the PSD values of all sources in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Given our previous use of connectivity analysis to study mTBI using Granger causality (Zouridakis et al, 2012 ), phase synchronization (Dimitriadis et al, 2015b ), and cross-frequency coupling (Antonakakis et al, 2015 , 2016 ) of spontaneous MEG, as well as brain activation patterns of both EEG and MEG at the sensor (Li et al, 2015 ) and source (Zouridakis et al, 2016 ; Li et al, 2017 ) levels, an obvious question is whether the possible presence of an RC organization could provide some complementary features to the SW organization that is typically seen in mTBI FCGs. Thus, in the present study, we hypothesize that exploring brain connectivity network models derived from spontaneous MEG activity using estimators for both intra and cross-frequency couplings (Buzsáki and Watson, 2012 ) would help identify meaningful network topological features in compromised mTBI brain networks that could be used as guideline biomarkers for validating the recovery from mTBI (Bharath et al, 2015 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given our previous use of connectivity analysis to study mTBI using Granger causality (Zouridakis et al, 2012 ), phase synchronization (Dimitriadis et al, 2015b ), and cross-frequency coupling (Antonakakis et al, 2015 , 2016 ) of spontaneous MEG, as well as brain activation patterns of both EEG and MEG at the sensor (Li et al, 2015 ) and source (Zouridakis et al, 2016 ; Li et al, 2017 ) levels, an obvious question is whether the possible presence of an RC organization could provide some complementary features to the SW organization that is typically seen in mTBI FCGs. Thus, in the present study, we hypothesize that exploring brain connectivity network models derived from spontaneous MEG activity using estimators for both intra and cross-frequency couplings (Buzsáki and Watson, 2012 ) would help identify meaningful network topological features in compromised mTBI brain networks that could be used as guideline biomarkers for validating the recovery from mTBI (Bharath et al, 2015 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, MEG can also be combined with EEG to characterize activity in the brain associated with TBI. In 2015, Li et al published a study in which they analyzed resting-state MEG and EEG activity at 68 brain regions of interest [38]. Comparing brain activation maps between patients with mild TBI and controls, they found significant differences in low-frequency activity on both EEG and MEG.…”
Section: Characterizing Connectivity Abnormalities and Correlating Wimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients with traumatic brain injury demonstrate increased activation in the delta and theta frequency bands (Haneef, Levin, Frost, & Mizrahi, 2013;Li et al, 2015;Thatcher, 2006). Increased theta activity is an indicator of poorer language performance, evidenced by a higher number of stimulus cues given in an object naming task.…”
Section: Traumatic Brain Injurymentioning
confidence: 99%