Comparison and integration of MEG and fMRI

MEG directly measures the neuronal events and has greater temporal resolution than fMRI, which has limited temporal resolution mainly due to the larger timescale of the hemodynamic response. On the other hand fMRI has advantages in spatial resolution, while the localization results with MEG can be ambiguous due to the non-uniqueness of the electromagnetic inverse problem. Thus, these methods could provide complementary information and could be used to create both spatially and temporally accurate models of brain function. We investigated the degree of overlap, revealed by the two imaging methods, in areas involved in sensory or motor processing in healthy subjects and neurosurgical patients. Furthermore, we used the spatial information from fMRI to construct a spatiotemporal model of the MEG data in order to investigate the sensorimotor system and to create a spatiotemporal model of its function. We compared the localization results from the MEG and fMRI with invasive electrophysiological cortical mapping. We used a recently introduced method, contextual clustering, for hypothesis testing of fMRI data and assessed the the effect of neighbourhood information use on the reproducibility of fMRI results. Using MEG, we identified the ipsilateral primary sensorimotor cortex (SMI) as a novel source area contributing to the somatosensory evoked fields (SEF) to median nerve stimulation. Using combined MEG and fMRI measurements we found that two separate areas in the lateral fissure may be the generators for the SEF responses from the secondary somatosensory cortex region. The two imaging methods indicated activation in corresponding locations. By using complementary information from MEG and fMRI we established a spatiotemporal model of somatosensory cortical processing. This spatiotemporal model of cerebral activity was in good agreement with results from several studies using invasive electrophysiological measurements and with anatomical studies in monkey and man concerning the connections between somatosensory areas. In neurosurgical patients, the MEG dipole model turned out to be more reliable than fMRI in the identification of the central sulcus. This was due to prominent activation in non-primary areas in fMRI, which in some cases led to erroneous or ambiguous localization of the central sulcus.