Search

Multimodal neuroimaging using EEG and fMRI provides deeper insights into brain function by improving the spatial and temporal resolution of the acquired data. However, simultaneous EEG-fMRI inevitably compromises the quality of the EEG and fMRI signals due to the high degree of interaction between the two systems. Fluctuations in the magnetic flux flowing through the participant and the EEG system, whether due to movement within the magnetic field of the scanner or to changes in magnetic field strength, induce electrical potentials in the EEG recordings that mask the much weaker electrical activity of the neuronal populations. A number of different methods have been proposed to reduce MR artifacts. We present an overview of the most commonly used methods and an evaluation of the methods using three sets of diverse EEG data. We limited the evaluation to open-access and easy-to-use methods and a reference signal regression method using a set of six carbon-wire loops (CWL), which allowed evaluation of their added value. The evaluation was performed by comparing EEG signals recorded outside the MRI scanner with artifact-corrected EEG signals recorded simultaneously with fMRI. To quantify and evaluate the quality of artifact reduction methods in terms of the spectral content of the signal, we analyzed changes in oscillatory activity during a resting-state and a finger tapping motor task. The quality of artifact reduction in the time domain was assessed using data collected during a visual stimulation task. In the study we utilized hierarchical Bayesian probabilistic modeling for statistical inference and observed significant differences between the evaluated methods in the success of artifact reduction and associated signal quality in both the frequency and time domains. In particular, the CWL system proved superior to the other methods evaluated in improving spectral contrast in the alpha and beta bands and in recovering visual evoked responses. Based on the results of the evaluation study, we proposed guidelines for selecting the optimal method for MR artifact reduction., Competing Interests: GR consults for and holds equity in Neumora Therapeutics and Manifest Technologies. JD consults for Manifest Technologies. JD, AK, and AM have previously consulted for Neumora (formerly BlackThorn Therapeutics). The remaining author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Kraljič, Matkovič, Purg, Demšar and Repovš.)