Trace:
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
aslin_2015 [2016/05/28 14:48] – silvia | aslin_2015 [2016/05/28 15:41] (current) – silvia | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
\\ | \\ | ||
\\ | \\ | ||
+ | When a specific pool of neurons is active, the hemodynamic response is believed to be localized | ||
+ | within 1–3mmof this neural activity (e.g., Shmuel et al. 2007, using 7T in human occipital cortex, | ||
+ | V1) and likely represents the local field potentials rather than spiking activity of clusters of neurons | ||
+ | (Goense& | ||
+ | the rapid change in neural activity. Even after a brief burst of stimulus-evoked neural activity | ||
+ | (<1 s), the adult hemodynamic response peaks approximately 6 s later and the concentrations of | ||
+ | Oxy-Hb and deOxy-Hb do not return to baseline until more than 10 s after the stimulus was | ||
+ | initially presented (Malonek & Grinvald 1996) (see Figure 1). These spatial-temporal aspects of | ||
+ | the hemodynamic response greatly constrain the designs and interpretations that can be drawn | ||
+ | from neuroimaging methods that rely on neurovascular coupling. | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | FMRI employs the presentation of radio wave pulses in a staticmagnetic field to record what is called the blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) | ||
+ | response that varies with fluctuations in local concentrations of deOxy-Hb. By contrast, fNIRS | ||
+ | simultaneously records changes in bothOxy-Hb and deOxy-Hb by employing two wavelengths of | ||
+ | near-infrared light (e.g., 690 nm and 830 nm), which span the crossover point in their respective | ||
+ | absorbance spectra. | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | While the spatial resolution of fMRI varieswith the strength of the staticmagnetic field (B0; e.g., | ||
+ | 1.5T, 3T, or 7T) and the specific scanning parameters, the typical fMRI voxel size of 3mm3 is well | ||
+ | matched to the resolution of the hemodynamic response itself. In contrast, current fNIRS systems | ||
+ | have a much coarser spatial resolution. As shown in Figure 2, near-infrared light is delivered to | ||
+ | the surface of the scalp via optical fibers (emitters). Surrounding each emitter are one or more | ||
+ | optical fibers (detectors) that collect a small fraction of the photons that return to the surface of | ||
+ | the scalp after passing through various layers of neural tissue between the emitter and the detector. | ||
+ | Each pair of optical fibers that link an emitter and a detector is referred to as a fNIRS channel | ||
+ | and samples the underlying tissue from which the hemodynamic response is being recorded. | ||
+ | Photons leaving the emitter and reaching the detector are primarily absorbed in the surface layers | ||
+ | above the cortex, including the scalp, skull, cerebral-spinal fluid, and surface vasculature (see | ||
+ | Figure 2). The remaining photons travel along a banana-shaped trajectory that dips into the | ||
+ | underlying cortex. The distance between the emitter and detector determines the lowest point of | ||
+ | the banana-shaped trajectory; the greater the separation between the two, the deeper the trajectory | ||
+ | through the cortex. However, greater separation also leads to greater attenuation of the signal. | ||
+ | Current systems typically employ emitter-detector separations of 2–3 cm, which optimize cortical | ||
+ | sampling and signal strength.However, | ||
+ | between the surface of the cortex and the scalp. This introduces a substantial source of noise into | ||
+ | what is a rather weak signal. Thus, signal averaging, as in the ERP, must be used to factor out | ||
+ | noncortical noise (under the assumption that background systemic vascular effects are uncorrelated | ||
+ | with the presentation of a stimulus). | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | One final consideration regarding spatial resolution of fNIRS is skull thickness. The thickness | ||
+ | of the skull is directly related to the amount of cortex that is being recorded from in a given fNIRS | ||
+ | channel. This is important not only because the skull is quite thin in neonates (6mmon average) and | ||
+ | becomes thicker with age (10 mm by age 7) but also because skull thickness varies across regions | ||
+ | of the head within a given age (Beauchamp et al. 2011), creating a confound when examining | ||
+ | absolute changes in cortical activation across ages or across brain regions (e.g., hemispheres). This | ||
+ | underlying anatomy should be taken into consideration for studies that compare neural activity | ||
+ | to a given stimulus across fNIRS channels without normalizing these activations to a second | ||
+ | stimulus. In the future, anatomical data that compensate for this differential path length from | ||
+ | fNIRS could help to prevent the false attribution of hemispheric and regional differences (unless | ||
+ | only relative changes in activation comprise the dependent measure). In addition to variability in | ||
+ | skull thickness, it is important to determine the distance from the tips of the optical fibers on the | ||
+ | scalp to the depth of the cortical area that is being targeted in a given recording session. | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | Finally, the temporal resolution of fMRI is typically 0.5 Hz (i.e., a whole-brain sample every | ||
+ | 2 s). This slow sample rate has proven to be sufficient for most applications because the underlying | ||
+ | hemodynamic response is an order of magnitude slower. In contrast, fNIRS is typically recorded | ||
+ | at 10 Hz and higher sampling rates are possible because detection of the optical response is not | ||
+ | limited by the interaction between slice selection and gradient encoding in fMRI. Thus, fNIRS | ||
+ | has much better temporal resolution than fMRI and in principle could provide a more accurate | ||
+ | measure of the shape and timing of the hemodynamic response. In practice, however, that potential | ||
+ | has not yet been realized, in part because of noise from noncortical, | ||
+ | (which does not affect fMRI) and because infants cannot provide a sufficient number of stimulus blocks (or events) to average out the noise. Moreover, phased-array head coils have improved the | ||
+ | sampling rates of fMRI (Keil et al. 2013) so that the intrinsic superiority of fNIRS in the temporal | ||
+ | domain is not likely to be a significant advantage in the future. | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | \\ | ||