A comparison between electric source localisation and fMRI during somatosensory stimulation

Spatiotemporal activation of the two visual pathways in form discrimination and spatial location: A brain mapping study

“…In the time intervals of 136 -172 msec and 280 -312 msec, the positions of the pair of moving dipoles were near the fMRI foci in GTi/GF and Ga/PCu, respectively: the average distances are 13.2 mm for the left GTi/GF, 16.4 mm for the right GTi/GF, 10.2 mm for the left Ga/PCu, and 13.7 mm for the right Ga/PCu (see Tables I and II). Such distances, which fall within the range of spatial resolution for a 128-channel ERP recording system, were similar to those reported by previous comparisons between high-resolution EEG and fMRI [e.g., Gerloff et al, 1996;Grimm et al, 1998]. These data consistently suggested that the fMRI activation foci found in Experiment 1 were the major source of the ERPs obtained in the present study and supported the validity of using the fMRI foci to constrain the ERP source analysis.…”

Integration of EEG source imaging and fMRI during continuous viewing of natural movies

“…For example, by solving the EEG inverse problem, one can compare the source location of a particular event-related potential (ERP) component with that of a peak BOLD activation site. Correspondence between ERP sources and fMRI activation has been reported in auditory [6][7][8], visual [9][10][11] and somatosensory [12] cortex. However, there also exist a growing number of studies which have reported varying degrees of ERP-fMRI correspondence depending on the chosen ERP component [13,14], anatomical area [15] and individual subject [15,16].…”

Studying the human somatosensory hand area: A new way to compare fMRI and MEG

“…The widely used approach is to bring the signal obtained with two different methods into a common reference space and to analyse the spatial distance between corresponding activations. Spatial deviations between the two signals have been found to be in the range of 5 mm (Grimm et al, 1998) to 40 mm (Roberts and Rowley, 1997), with other studies reporting average differences of 10-15 mm (Del Gratta et al, 2002;Kober et al, 2001;Stippich et al, 1998). The problem with the interpretation of these deviations is three-fold.…”

“…A number of studies compared localization of activation within the sensorimotor cortex using fMRI versus MEG (Del Gratta et al, 2002;Kober et al, 2001;Roberts and Rowley, 1997;Stippich et al, 1998) or fMRI versus EEG (Christmann et al, 2002;Grimm et al, 1998;Thees et al, 2003). The widely used approach is to bring the signal obtained with two different methods into a common reference space and to analyse the spatial distance between corresponding activations.…”