The impact of artifact removal approaches on TMS–EEG signal
Author:
Bertazzoli GiacomoORCID, Esposito Romina, Mutanen Tuomas P., Ferrari ClarissaORCID, Ilmoniemi Risto J.ORCID, Miniussi CarloORCID, Bortoletto MartaORCID
Abstract
AbstractTranscranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-evoked potentials (TEPs) allow one to assess cortical excitability and effective connectivity in clinical and basic research. However, obtaining clean TEPs is challenging due to the various TMS-related artifacts that contaminate the electroencephalographic (EEG) signal when the TMS pulse is delivered. Different preprocessing approaches have been employed to remove the artifacts, but the degree of artifact reduction or signal distortion introduced in this phase of analysis is still unknown. Knowing and controlling this potential source of uncertainty will increase the inter-rater reliability of TEPs and improve the comparability between TMS–EEG studies. The goal of this study was to assess the variability in TEP waveforms due to of the use of different preprocessing pipelines. To accomplish this aim, we preprocessed the same TMS–EEG data with four different pipelines and compared the results. The dataset was obtained from 16 subjects in two identical recording sessions, each session consisting of both left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and left inferior parietal lobule stimulation at 100% of the resting motor threshold. Considerable differences in TEP amplitudes were found between the preprocessing pipelines. Topographies of TEPs from the different pipelines were all highly correlated (ρ>0.8) at latencies over 100 ms. By contrast, waveforms at latencies under 100 ms showed a variable level of correlation, with ρ ranging between 0.2 and 0.9. Moreover, the test–retest reliability of TEPs depended on the preprocessing pipeline. Taken together, these results take us to suggest that the choice of the preprocessing approach has a marked impact on the final TEP, and that caution should be taken when comparing TMS–EEG studies that used different approaches. Finally, we propose strategies to control this source of variability.
Publisher
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Reference54 articles.
1. TMSEEG: A MATLAB-Based Graphical User Interface for Processing Electrophysiological Signals during Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation;Front. Neural Circuits,2016 2. Predicting Alzheimer’s disease severity by means of TMS–EEG coregistration;Neurobiol. Aging,2019 3. Beaulieu, L.D. , Flamand, V.H. , Massé-Alarie, H. , Schneider, C. , 2017. Reliability and minimal detectable change of transcranial magnetic stimulation outcomes in healthy adults: A systematic review. Brain Stimul. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2016.12.008 4. Belardinelli, P. , Biabani, M. , Blumberger, D.M. , Bortoletto, M. , Casarotto, S. , David, O. , Desideri, D. , Etkin, A. , Ferrarelli, F. , Fitzgerald, P.B. , Fornito, A. , Gordon, P.C. , Gosseries, O. , Harquel, S. , Julkunen, P. , Keller, C.J. , Kimiskidis, V.K. , Lioumis, P. , Miniussi, C. , Rosanova, M. , Rossi, S. , Sarasso, S. , Wu, W. , Zrenner, C. , Daskalakis, Z.J. , Rogasch, N.C. , Massimini, M. , Ziemann, U. , Ilmoniemi, R.J. , 2019. Reproducibility in TMS–EEG studies: A call for data sharing, standard procedures and effective experimental control. Brain Stimul. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2019.01.010 5. Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing;J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B,1995
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|