Effects of EEG electrodes and RF coils in simultaneous EEG - MRI recording, with a HR model

L. M. Angelone1, A. Potthast1, S. Iwaki1, F. Segonne1, L. Wald1, B. Fischl1, J. W. Belliveau1, G. Bonmassar1

1
Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, United States
This study investigates the effects of the electromagnetic fields on human-head tissues during simultaneous EEG/MRI recording. We present
simulations using the Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) algorithm and a realistic high-resolution head model. We used surface and birdcage
RF coils with 124 EEG electrodes. Results show that the presence of EEG electrodes produces an increase of the local Specific Absorption Rate on
the skin. This increase is higher using a birdcage coil. These results discourage the use of standard EEG electrodes during MRI recording.
INTRODUCTION. A growing number of laboratories are taking advantage of the technology of EEG recording during MRI. However, due to
Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) considerations and risks of burns [1], this technology may present a safety hazard especially at high B0 fields. We
conducted simulations to evaluate the distribution of the SAR (local and average) on a high-resolution head model, with or without EEG electrodes.
METHODS. The study was based on the FDTD algorithm [2]. A High-
A B Resolution head model (4395536 Yee cells [2]) was realized applying a
segmentation [3] to the anatomical MRI data of an adult male subject
(Fig.1a). Eight different types of tissue were distinguished and their
physical properties selected according to the literature [4]. The dimension
of each cell was 1x1x1mm and the total volume considered, including the
free space around the model, was 296*296*390mm. The surface coil [5]
(diameter 140mm, thickness 1mm) was placed on the posterior part of the
head, parallel to the occipital area; the source placed on the RF coil was a
sinusoidal current generator with a 1A-peak-amplitude. The birdcage coil
[6] was composed of 16 wires (length 310mm), closed by two perfect
conductive loops at each extreme (diameter 260mm, thickness 1mm) and
placed symmetrically around the head. A circular excitation was simulated
driving each wire with a current generator of 1A-peak amplitude and a
phase-shift of 22.5o respect to the closest ones. All the simulations were
Figure 1. A) High-resolution head model used in this study. B) 3D view of
the model with a birdcage coil and 124 EEG electrodes in place. conducted at the frequency of 300 MHz, corresponding to a static MRI field
of 7T. Software commercially available (XFDTD, REMCOM Co.) was
used for the simulations. The positions of the 124 electrodes and wires were digitized on the head of the subject and imported on the high-resolution
model (Fig1b).
A RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. Fig. 2 shows the SAR values obtained using
B both the surface and the birdcage coil, with or without the presence of EEG
electrodes. These results are normalized to the same input power. It can be
noticed that: 1) In the case without electrodes (Fig.2 A-B), comparing the surface
and the birdcage coil, the SAR increase is more uniformly distributed with the
birdcage. This is related to the symmetric distribution of the sources on the
birdcage coil. 2) In the case with electrodes (Fig.2 C-D, white arrow), the
presence of electrodes and leads focuses the electric field, greatly increasing the
local SAR on the skin, with either surface or birdcage coil. 3) The relative
increase electrodes/no-electrodes of the local SAR is higher using a birdcage coil
(local SAR on skin with electrodes/without electrodes = 6.29) than a surface coil
(local SAR on skin with electrodes/without electrodes = 1.67).
CONCLUSIONS. Simulations show that the presence of the EEG electrodes
always increases the local SAR on the skin of the subject. Furthermore, the
C D relative increase electrodes/no-electrodes of the local SAR is higher using a
birdcage coil with respect to a surface coil. Results of this work discourage the
use of standard EEG electrodes during MRI recording.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. We thank Drs. G. Sorensen, K. Kwong and Patrick
Purdon for their suggestions during the realization of this study. This work was
supported by the Whitaker Foundation.
REFERENCES.
1. Chou, C.K., et al., Bioelectromagnetics, 1996. 17(3): p. 195-208.
2. Kunz, K.S. and R.J. Luebbers, The finite difference time domain method for
electromagnetics. 1993, Boca Raton: CRC Press.
3. Dale, A.M., B. Fischl, and M.I. Sereno, Neuroimage, 1999. 9(2): p. 179-94.
4. Gabriel, C., S. Gabriel, and E. Corthout, Phys. Med. Biol., 1996. 41: p. 2231–
Figure 2. Normalized SAR results, obtained using surface and
birdcage coil, in the case without (A-B) and with EEG electrodes 2249.
(C-D). The presence of the EEG electrodes increases the local 5. Collins, C.M. and M.B. Smith, Magn Reson Med, 2001. 45(4): p. 692-9.
SAR in both cases (white arrows, C - D) 6. Jin, J.M., Electromagnetic analysis and design in magnetic resonance imaging.
1999, Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 11 (2003) 2515