Cargando…

Transforming and comparing data between standard SQUID and OPM-MEG systems

Optically pumped magnetometers (OPMs) have recently become so sensitive that they are suitable for use in magnetoencephalography (MEG). These sensors solve operational problems of the current standard MEG, where superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) gradiometers and magnetometers are b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Marhl, Urban, Jodko-Władzińska, Anna, Brühl, Rüdiger, Sander, Tilmann, Jazbinšek, Vojko
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8769297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35045107
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262669
_version_ 1784635100936273920
author Marhl, Urban
Jodko-Władzińska, Anna
Brühl, Rüdiger
Sander, Tilmann
Jazbinšek, Vojko
author_facet Marhl, Urban
Jodko-Władzińska, Anna
Brühl, Rüdiger
Sander, Tilmann
Jazbinšek, Vojko
author_sort Marhl, Urban
collection PubMed
description Optically pumped magnetometers (OPMs) have recently become so sensitive that they are suitable for use in magnetoencephalography (MEG). These sensors solve operational problems of the current standard MEG, where superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) gradiometers and magnetometers are being used. The main advantage of OPMs is that they do not require cryogenics for cooling. Therefore, they can be placed closer to the scalp and are much easier to use. Here, we measured auditory evoked fields (AEFs) with both SQUID- and OPM-based MEG systems for a group of subjects to better understand the usage of a limited sensor count OPM-MEG. We present a theoretical framework that transforms the within subject data and equivalent simulation data from one MEG system to the other. This approach works on the principle of solving the inverse problem with one system, and then using the forward model to calculate the magnetic fields expected for the other system. For the source reconstruction, we used a minimum norm estimate (MNE) of the current distribution. Two different volume conductor models were compared: the homogeneous conducting sphere and the three-shell model of the head. The transformation results are characterized by a relative error and cross-correlation between the measured and the estimated magnetic field maps of the AEFs. The results for both models are encouraging. Since some commercial OPMs measure multiple components of the magnetic field simultaneously, we additionally analyzed the effect of tangential field components. Overall, our dual-axis OPM-MEG with 15 sensors yields similar information to a 62-channel SQUID-MEG with its field of view restricted to the right hemisphere.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8769297
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87692972022-01-20 Transforming and comparing data between standard SQUID and OPM-MEG systems Marhl, Urban Jodko-Władzińska, Anna Brühl, Rüdiger Sander, Tilmann Jazbinšek, Vojko PLoS One Research Article Optically pumped magnetometers (OPMs) have recently become so sensitive that they are suitable for use in magnetoencephalography (MEG). These sensors solve operational problems of the current standard MEG, where superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) gradiometers and magnetometers are being used. The main advantage of OPMs is that they do not require cryogenics for cooling. Therefore, they can be placed closer to the scalp and are much easier to use. Here, we measured auditory evoked fields (AEFs) with both SQUID- and OPM-based MEG systems for a group of subjects to better understand the usage of a limited sensor count OPM-MEG. We present a theoretical framework that transforms the within subject data and equivalent simulation data from one MEG system to the other. This approach works on the principle of solving the inverse problem with one system, and then using the forward model to calculate the magnetic fields expected for the other system. For the source reconstruction, we used a minimum norm estimate (MNE) of the current distribution. Two different volume conductor models were compared: the homogeneous conducting sphere and the three-shell model of the head. The transformation results are characterized by a relative error and cross-correlation between the measured and the estimated magnetic field maps of the AEFs. The results for both models are encouraging. Since some commercial OPMs measure multiple components of the magnetic field simultaneously, we additionally analyzed the effect of tangential field components. Overall, our dual-axis OPM-MEG with 15 sensors yields similar information to a 62-channel SQUID-MEG with its field of view restricted to the right hemisphere. Public Library of Science 2022-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8769297/ /pubmed/35045107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262669 Text en © 2022 Marhl et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Marhl, Urban
Jodko-Władzińska, Anna
Brühl, Rüdiger
Sander, Tilmann
Jazbinšek, Vojko
Transforming and comparing data between standard SQUID and OPM-MEG systems
title Transforming and comparing data between standard SQUID and OPM-MEG systems
title_full Transforming and comparing data between standard SQUID and OPM-MEG systems
title_fullStr Transforming and comparing data between standard SQUID and OPM-MEG systems
title_full_unstemmed Transforming and comparing data between standard SQUID and OPM-MEG systems
title_short Transforming and comparing data between standard SQUID and OPM-MEG systems
title_sort transforming and comparing data between standard squid and opm-meg systems
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8769297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35045107
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262669
work_keys_str_mv AT marhlurban transformingandcomparingdatabetweenstandardsquidandopmmegsystems
AT jodkowładzinskaanna transformingandcomparingdatabetweenstandardsquidandopmmegsystems
AT bruhlrudiger transformingandcomparingdatabetweenstandardsquidandopmmegsystems
AT sandertilmann transformingandcomparingdatabetweenstandardsquidandopmmegsystems
AT jazbinsekvojko transformingandcomparingdatabetweenstandardsquidandopmmegsystems