|
1
|
Blenkmann AO, Leske SL, Llorens A, Lin JJ, Chang EF, Brunner P, Schalk G, Ivanovic J, Larsson PG, Knight RT, Endestad T, Solbakk AK. Anatomical registration of intracranial electrodes. Robust model-based localization and deformable smooth brain-shift compensation methods. J Neurosci Methods 2024; 404:110056. [PMID: 38224783 DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2024.110056] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2023] [Revised: 11/27/2023] [Accepted: 01/03/2024] [Indexed: 01/17/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intracranial electrodes are typically localized from post-implantation CT artifacts. Automatic algorithms localizing low signal-to-noise ratio artifacts and high-density electrode arrays are missing. Additionally, implantation of grids/strips introduces brain deformations, resulting in registration errors when fusing post-implantation CT and pre-implantation MR images. Brain-shift compensation methods project electrode coordinates to cortex, but either fail to produce smooth solutions or do not account for brain deformations. NEW METHODS We first introduce GridFit, a model-based fitting approach that simultaneously localizes all electrodes' CT artifacts in grids, strips, or depth arrays. Second, we present CEPA, a brain-shift compensation algorithm combining orthogonal-based projections, spring-mesh models, and spatial regularization constraints. RESULTS We tested GridFit on ∼6000 simulated scenarios. The localization of CT artifacts showed robust performance under difficult scenarios, such as noise, overlaps, and high-density implants (<1 mm errors). Validation with data from 20 challenging patients showed 99% accurate localization of the electrodes (3160/3192). We tested CEPA brain-shift compensation with data from 15 patients. Projections accounted for simple mechanical deformation principles with < 0.4 mm errors. The inter-electrode distances smoothly changed across neighbor electrodes, while changes in inter-electrode distances linearly increased with projection distance. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS GridFit succeeded in difficult scenarios that challenged available methods and outperformed visual localization by preserving the inter-electrode distance. CEPA registration errors were smaller than those obtained for well-established alternatives. Additionally, modeling resting-state high-frequency activity in five patients further supported CEPA. CONCLUSION GridFit and CEPA are versatile tools for registering intracranial electrode coordinates, providing highly accurate results even in the most challenging implantation scenarios. The methods are implemented in the iElectrodes open-source toolbox.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alejandro Omar Blenkmann
- Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway; RITMO Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Rhythm, Time, and Motion, University of Oslo, Norway.
| | - Sabine Liliana Leske
- Department of Musicology, University of Oslo, Norway; RITMO Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Rhythm, Time, and Motion, University of Oslo, Norway; Department of Neuropsychology, Helgeland Hospital, Mosjøen, Norway
| | - Anaïs Llorens
- Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway; Department of Psychology and the Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute, University of California, Berkeley, USA; Université de Franche-Comté, SUPMICROTECH, CNRS, Institut FEMTO-ST, 25000 Besançon, France; Université Paris Cité, Institute of Psychiatry and Neuroscience of Paris (IPNP), INSERM U1266, Team TURC, 75014 Paris, France
| | - Jack J Lin
- Department of Neurology and Center for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, USA
| | - Edward F Chang
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, USA
| | - Peter Brunner
- Department of Neurology, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA; National Center for Adaptive Neurotechnologies, Albany, NY, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Gerwin Schalk
- Department of Neurology, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA; National Center for Adaptive Neurotechnologies, Albany, NY, USA; Tianqiao and Chrissy Chen Institute, Chen Frontier Lab for Applied Neurotechnology, Shanghai, China; Fudan University/Huashan Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Shanghai, China
| | | | | | - Robert Thomas Knight
- Department of Psychology and the Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute, University of California, Berkeley, USA
| | - Tor Endestad
- Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway; RITMO Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Rhythm, Time, and Motion, University of Oslo, Norway; Department of Neuropsychology, Helgeland Hospital, Mosjøen, Norway
| | - Anne-Kristin Solbakk
- Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway; RITMO Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Rhythm, Time, and Motion, University of Oslo, Norway; Department of Neurosurgery, Oslo University Hospital, Norway; Department of Neuropsychology, Helgeland Hospital, Mosjøen, Norway
| |
Collapse
|