{"title":"Mark3D - A semi-automated open-source toolbox for 3D head- surface reconstruction and electrode position registration using a smartphone camera video.","authors":"Suranjita Ganguly, Malaaika Mihir Chhaya, Ankita Jain, Aditya Koppula, Mohan Raghavan, Kousik Sarathy Sridharan","doi":"10.1007/s11517-024-03228-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Source localization in EEG necessitates co-registering the EEG sensor locations with the subject's MRI, where EEG sensor locations are typically captured using electromagnetic tracking or 3D scanning of the subject's head with EEG cap, using commercially available 3D scanners. Both methods have drawbacks, where, electromagnetic tracking is slow and immobile, while 3D scanners are expensive. Photogrammetry offers a cost-effective alternative but requires multiple photos to sample the head, with good spatial sampling to adequately reconstruct the head surface. Post-reconstruction, the existing tools for electrode position labelling on the 3D head-surface have limited visual feedback and do not easily accommodate customized montages, which are typical in multi-modal measurements. We introduce Mark3D, an open-source, integrated tool for 3D head-surface reconstruction from phone camera video. It eliminates the need for keeping track of spatial sampling during image capture for video-based photogrammetry reconstruction. It also includes blur detection algorithms, a user-friendly interface for electrode and tracking, and integrates with popular toolboxes such as FieldTrip and MNE Python. The accuracy of the proposed method was benchmarked with the head-surface derived from a commercially available handheld 3D scanner Einscan-Pro + (Shining 3D Inc.,) which we treat as the \"ground truth\". We used reconstructed head-surfaces of ground truth (G1) and phone camera video (M<sub>1080</sub>) to mark the EEG electrode locations in 3D space using a dedicated UI provided in the tool. The electrode locations were then used to form pseudo-specific MRI templates for individual subjects to reconstruct source information. Somatosensory source activations in response to vibrotactile stimuli were estimated and compared between G1 and M<sub>1080</sub>. The mean positional errors of the EEG electrodes between G1 and M<sub>1080</sub> in 3D space were found to be 0.09 ± 0.01 mm across different cortical areas, with temporal and occipital areas registering a relatively higher error than other regions such as frontal, central or parietal areas. The error in source reconstruction was found to be 0.033 ± 0.016 mm and 0.037 ± 0.017 mm in the left and right cortical hemispheres respectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":49840,"journal":{"name":"Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-024-03228-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Source localization in EEG necessitates co-registering the EEG sensor locations with the subject's MRI, where EEG sensor locations are typically captured using electromagnetic tracking or 3D scanning of the subject's head with EEG cap, using commercially available 3D scanners. Both methods have drawbacks, where, electromagnetic tracking is slow and immobile, while 3D scanners are expensive. Photogrammetry offers a cost-effective alternative but requires multiple photos to sample the head, with good spatial sampling to adequately reconstruct the head surface. Post-reconstruction, the existing tools for electrode position labelling on the 3D head-surface have limited visual feedback and do not easily accommodate customized montages, which are typical in multi-modal measurements. We introduce Mark3D, an open-source, integrated tool for 3D head-surface reconstruction from phone camera video. It eliminates the need for keeping track of spatial sampling during image capture for video-based photogrammetry reconstruction. It also includes blur detection algorithms, a user-friendly interface for electrode and tracking, and integrates with popular toolboxes such as FieldTrip and MNE Python. The accuracy of the proposed method was benchmarked with the head-surface derived from a commercially available handheld 3D scanner Einscan-Pro + (Shining 3D Inc.,) which we treat as the "ground truth". We used reconstructed head-surfaces of ground truth (G1) and phone camera video (M1080) to mark the EEG electrode locations in 3D space using a dedicated UI provided in the tool. The electrode locations were then used to form pseudo-specific MRI templates for individual subjects to reconstruct source information. Somatosensory source activations in response to vibrotactile stimuli were estimated and compared between G1 and M1080. The mean positional errors of the EEG electrodes between G1 and M1080 in 3D space were found to be 0.09 ± 0.01 mm across different cortical areas, with temporal and occipital areas registering a relatively higher error than other regions such as frontal, central or parietal areas. The error in source reconstruction was found to be 0.033 ± 0.016 mm and 0.037 ± 0.017 mm in the left and right cortical hemispheres respectively.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1963, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing (MBEC) continues to serve the biomedical engineering community, covering the entire spectrum of biomedical and clinical engineering. The journal presents exciting and vital experimental and theoretical developments in biomedical science and technology, and reports on advances in computer-based methodologies in these multidisciplinary subjects. The journal also incorporates new and evolving technologies including cellular engineering and molecular imaging.
MBEC publishes original research articles as well as reviews and technical notes. Its Rapid Communications category focuses on material of immediate value to the readership, while the Controversies section provides a forum to exchange views on selected issues, stimulating a vigorous and informed debate in this exciting and high profile field.
MBEC is an official journal of the International Federation of Medical and Biological Engineering (IFMBE).