English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Modeling of the human skull in EEG source analysis

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons19593

Dannhauer,  Moritz
Methods and Development Unit Cortical Networks and Cognitive Functions , MPI for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons19779

Knösche,  Thomas R.
Methods and Development Unit Cortical Networks and Cognitive Functions , MPI for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Dannhauer, M., Lanfer, B., Wolters, C. H., & Knösche, T. R. (2011). Modeling of the human skull in EEG source analysis. Human Brain Mapping, 32(9), 1383-1399. doi:10.1002/hbm.21114.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0012-177E-1
Abstract
We used computer simulations to investigate finite element models of the layered structure of the human skull in EEG source analysis. Local models, where each skull location was modeled differently, and global models, where the skull was assumed to be homogeneous, were compared to a reference model, in which spongy and compact bone were explicitly accounted for. In both cases, isotropic and anisotropic conductivity assumptions were taken into account. We considered sources in the entire brain and determined errors both in the forward calculation and the reconstructed dipole position. Our results show that accounting for the local variations over the skull surface is important, whereas assuming isotropic or anisotropic skull conductivity has little influence. Moreover, we showed that, if using an isotropic and homogeneous skull model, the ratio between skin/brain and skull conductivities should be considerably lower than the commonly used 80:1. For skull modeling, we recommend (1) Local models: if compact and spongy bone can be identified with sufficient accuracy (e.g., from MRI) and their conductivities can be assumed to be known (e.g., from measurements), one should model these explicitly by assigning each voxel to one of the two conductivities, (2) Global models: if the conditions of (1) are not met, one should model the skull as either homogeneous and isotropic, but with considerably higher skull conductivity than the usual 0.0042 S/m, or as homogeneous and anisotropic, but with higher radial skull conductivity than the usual 0.0042 S/m and a considerably lower radial:tangential conductivity anisotropy than the usual 1:10.