Back

EEG denoising during transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation across simulated, phantom and human data

Woller, J. P.; Menrath, D.; Gharabaghi, A.

2024-05-14 neuroscience
10.1101/2024.05.13.593884 bioRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveThe acquisition of electroencephalogram (EEG) data during neurostimulation, particularly concurrent transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the auricular vagus nerve, introduces unique challenges for data preprocessing and analysis due to the presence of significant stimulation artifacts. This study evaluates various denoising techniques to address these challenges effectively. MethodsA variety of denoising techniques were investigated, including interpolation methods, spectral filtering, and spatial filtering techniques. The techniques evaluated included low-pass and notch filtering, spectrum interpolation, average artifact subtraction, the Zapline algorithm, and advanced methods such as independent component analysis (ICA), signal-space projection (SSP), and generalized eigendecomposition with stimulation artifact source separation (GED/SASS). The efficacy of these algorithms was evaluated across three distinct datasets: simulated data, data from a gelatin phantom model, and real human subject data. ResultsOur findings indicate that GED (SASS) and SSP significantly outperformed other methods in reducing artifacts while preserving the integrity of the EEG signal. ICA and Zapline were effective too, but came with important limitations. These methods demonstrated robustness across different data types and conditions, providing effective artifact mitigation with minimal disruption to other essential signal components. ConclusionThis comprehensive analysis demonstrates the efficacy of advanced spatial filtering techniques in the preprocessing of EEG data during auricular vagus nerve stimulation. These methods offer promising avenues for enhancing the quality and reliability of neurostimulation-associated EEG data, facilitating a deeper understanding and wider applications in clinical and research settings.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
26.7%
2
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
10.4%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.5%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.1%
5
Brain Stimulation
112 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.1%
50% of probability mass above
6
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.0%
7
Clinical Neurophysiology
50 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
8
IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering
40 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.0%
9
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.8%
10
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
11
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
12
Biomedical Signal Processing and Control
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
13
Brain Topography
23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
14
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.4%
15
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
34 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
16
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.4%
17
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
18
Bioengineering
24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
19
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
20
Neuroscience Letters
28 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
21
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
22
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
23
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 36%
0.7%
24
Neuroinformatics
40 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
25
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
26
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
27
Neuroimage: Reports
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.5%
28
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
38 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%