27

Biomagnetism
Jaakko Malmivuo
Tampere University of Technology
27.1 Theoretical Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-1
Origin of Bioelectric and Biomagnetic Signals
Measurement of the Biomagnetic Signals Independence of
Bioelectric and Biomagnetic Signals
27.2 Sensitivity Distribution of Dipolar Electric and
Magnetic Leads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-3
Concepts of Lead Vector and Lead Field Lead Fields of
Leads Detecting the Electric and Magnetic Dipole Moments of
a Volume Source Independence of Dipolar Electric and
Magnetic Leads
27.3 Magnetocardiography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-7
Selection of the Source Model for MCG Detection of the
Equivalent Magnetic Dipole of the Heart Diagnostic
Performance of ECG and MCG Technical Reasons to Use
the MCG Theoretical Reasons to Use the MCG
27.4 Magnetoencephalography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-12
Sensitivity Distribution of the Axial Magnetometer
Sensitivity Distribution of the Planar Gradiometer
Half-Sensitivity Volumes of Electro- and
Magnetoencephalography Leads Sensitivity of EEG and
MEG to Radial and Tangential Sources
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-15
Since the rst detection of the magnetocardiogram (MCG) in 1963 by Baule and McFee [Baule and
McFee, 1963], new diagnostic information from biomagnetic signals has been widely anticipated. The
rst recording of the magnetoencephalogram (MEG) was made in 1968 by David Cohen [Cohen, 1968],
but it was not possible to record biomagnetic signals with good signal quality before the invention of the
superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) in 1970 [Zimmerman et al., 1970].
27.1 Theoretical Background
27.1.1 Origin of Bioelectric and Biomagnetic Signals
In 1819, Hans Christian rsted demonstrated that when an electric current ows in a conductor,
it generates a magnetic eld around it [rsted, 1820]. This fundamental connection between electricity
27-1
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
27-2 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
and magnetism was expressed in exact form by James Clerk Maxwell in 1864 [Maxwell, 1865]. In bioelec-
tromagnetism, this means that when electrically active tissue produces a bioelectric eld, it simultaneously
produces a biomagnetic eld as well. Thus the origin of both the bioelectric and the biomagnetic signals
is the bioelectric activity of the tissue.
The following equations describe the electric potential eld and the magnetic eld of a volume source
distribution

J
i
in an inhomogeneous volume conductor. The inhomogeneous volume conductor is repres-
ented by a piecewise homogeneous conductor where the regions of different conductivity are separated
by surfaces S.
4(r) =

J
i

1
r

dv +

S
j
(

j
)

1
r

dS
j
(27.1)
4

H(r) =

J
i

1
r

dv +

S
j
(

j
)

1
r

dS
j
(27.2)
The rst term on the right-hand side of Equation 27.1 and Equation 27.2 describes the contribution of
the volume source, and the second term describes the contribution of boundaries separating regions of
different conductivity, that is, the contribution of the inhomogeneities within the volume conductor. These
equations were developed by David Geselowitz [Geselowitz, 1967, 1970].
27.1.2 Measurement of the Biomagnetic Signals
The amplitude of the biomagnetic signals is very low. The strongest of them is the MCG, having an
amplitude on the order of 50 pT. This is roughly one-millionth of the static magnetic eld of the
earth. The amplitude of the MEG is roughly 1% of that of the MCG. This means that, in practice,
the MEG can only be measured with the SQUID and that the measurements must be done in a magnet-
ically shielded room. The MCG, instead, can be measured in the clinical environment without magnetic
shielding.
27.1.3 Independence of Bioelectric and Biomagnetic Signals
The source of the biomagnetic signal is the electric activity of the tissue. Therefore, the most interesting and
most important question in biomagnetism is whether the biomagnetic signals contain new information
that cannot be obtained from bioelectric signals; in other words, whether the bioelectric and biomagnetic
signals are fully independent or whether there is some interdependence. If the signals were fully inde-
pendent, the biomagnetic measurement would possibly give about the same amount of new information
as the bioelectric method. If there were some interdependence, the amount of new information would be
reduced.
Helmholtzs theorem states that A general vector eld, that vanishes at innity, can be completely
represented as the sum of two independent vector elds, one that is irrotational (zero curl) and another
that is solenoidal (zero divergence)[Morse and Feshbach, 1953; Plonsey and Collin, 1961]. The impressed
current density

J
i
is a vector eld that vanishes at innity and, according to the theorem, may be expressed
as the sum of two components:

J
i
=

J
i
F
+

J
i
V
(27.3)
where the subscripts F and V denote ow and vortex, respectively. By denition, these vector elds satisfy


J
i
F
= 0 and

J
i
V
= 0. We rst examine the independence of the electric and magnetic signals
in the innite homogeneous case, when the second term on the right-hand side of Equation 27.1 and
Equation 27.2, caused by inhomogeneities, is zero. The equation for the electric potential may be rewritten
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Biomagnetism 27-3
as
4 =

1
r

J
i
dv =

J
i
r
dv (27.4)
and that for the magnetic eld may be rewritten as
4

H =

1
r

J
i
dv =

J
i
r
dv (27.5)
Substituting Equation 27.3 into Equation 27.4 and Equation 27.5 shows that under homogeneous and
unbounded conditions, the bioelectric eld arises from

J
i
F
, which is the owsource, and the biomagnetic
eld arises from

J
i
V
, which is the vortex source. For this reason, in the early days of biomagnetic research
it was generally believed that the bioelectric and biomagnetic signals were fully independent. However,
it was soon recognized that this could not be the case. For example, when the heart beats, it produces
an electric eld recorded as the P, QRS, and T waves of the ECG, and it simultaneously produces the
corresponding magnetic waves recorded as the MCG. Thus the ECG and MCG signals are not fully
independent.
There have been several attempts to explain the independence/interdependence of bioelectric and
biomagnetic signals. Usually these attempts discuss different detailed experiments and fail to give a
satisfying general explanation. This important issue may be easily explained by considering the sensitivity
distributions of the ECG and MCG lead systems, and this will be discussed in the next section.
27.2 Sensitivity Distribution of Dipolar Electric and
Magnetic Leads
27.2.1 Concepts of Lead Vector and Lead Field
27.2.1.1 Lead Vector
Let us assume that two electrodes (or sets of electrodes) are placed on a volume conductor to form a lead.
Let us further assume that inside the volume conductor in a certain location Qthere is placed a unit dipole
the signals c
x
, c
y
, and c
z
, respectively. Due to linearity, if instead of the unit dipoles we place in the source
location dipoles that are p
x
, p
y
, and p
z
times the unit vectors, we measure signals that are c
x
p
x
, c
y
p
y
, and
c
z
p
z
, respectively.
If these dipoles are placed simultaneously to the source location, due to the principle of superposition,
we measure from the lead a voltage, that is,
V = c
x
p
x
+c
y
p
y
+c
z
p
z
(27.6)
These dipoles can be considered to be components of a dipole

p, that is,

p = p
x

i + p
y

j + p
z

k. We
may understand the coefcients c
x
, c
y
, and c
z
to be components of a vector c, that is, c = c
x

i + c
y

j +
c
z

k. Now we may express the lead voltage Equation 27.6 as the scalar product of the vector c and the
dipole

p as
V = c

p (27.7)
The vector c is a three-dimensional transfer coefcient that describes how a dipole source

p at a xed
point Q inside a volume conductor inuences the voltage measured from the lead and is called the lead
vector.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
consecutively in the x, y, and z directions (Figure 27.1a). Due to the sources, we measure from the lead
27-4 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
FIGURE 27.1 The concepts of (a) lead vector and (b) lead eld. (See the text for more details.)
The lead vector c describes what is the sensitivity of the lead to a source locating at the source location. It
is self-evident that for another source location the sensitivity may have another value. Thus the sensitivity,
that is, the lead vector, varies as a function of the location, and we may say that it has a certain distribution
in the volume conductor. This is called the sensitivity distribution.
27.2.1.2 Lead Field
We may dene the value of the lead vector at every point in the volume conductor. If we then place the lead
vectors to the points for which they are dened, we have a eld of lead vectors throughout the volume
conductor. This eld of lead vectors is called the lead eld J
L
. The lead eld illustrates the behavior of the
sensitivity in the volume conductor and is a very powerful tool in analyzing the properties of electric and
magnetic leads (see Figure 27.1b).
It follows from the principle of reciprocity, described by Hermann von Helmholtz in 1853 [Helmholtz,
1853], that the lead eld is identical to the electric current eld that arises in the volume conductor if a
unit current, called reciprocal current I
R
, is fed to the lead.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
z z z
i
p
x
i
p
y
j
p
z
k
j
x x x
y
V
xa
V
y
V
z
Q
Q
Q
y
y
k
i V
x
=c
x
p
x
i V
x
=c
x
p
x
V=c
x
p
x
+c
y
p
y
+c
z
p
z
c =c
x
i +c
y
j +c
z
k
p=p
x
i +p
y
j +p
z
k
j V
y
=c
y
p
y
j V
y
=c
y
p
y
kV
z
=c
z
p
z
kV
z
=c
z
p
z
V
x
y
p
y
j
p
x
i
p
x
k
Q
p
Superposition
Because of linearity, in each case V is linearly proportional to the dipole magnitude.
Vector algebra
Mathematically, the voltage V
is the scalar product of dipole p
and the lead vector c
Because of superpositon, V is proportional to
the sum of the potentials of each dipole component.
The proportionality coefficient is three-demensional.
It is the lead vector c
V=cp
V=cp= lcllplcosa
p
c
lpl cosa
a
z
Linearity
Biomagnetism 27-5
FIGURE 27.1 Continued.
When we know the lead eld

J
L
, we can determine the signal V
L
in the lead due to the volume source
distribution

J
i
. For each source element the signal is, of course, proportional to the dot product of the
source element and the lead eld at the source location, as shown in Equation 27.7. The contributions of
the whole volume source is obtained by integrating this throughout the volume source. Thus the signal
the volume source generates to the lead is
V
L
=

J
L

J
i
dv (27.8)
The lead eld may be illustrated either with lead vectors in certain locations in the volume conductor
or as the ow lines of the distribution of the reciprocal current in the volume conductor. This is called the
lead current eld. In the latter presentation, the lead eld current ow lines are oriented in the direction
of the sensitivity, and their density is proportional to the magnitude of the sensitivity.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Field of lead vectors
Reciprocity Alternative illustration
The field of the lead vectors c
k
is the lead field J
L
Lead voltage
V
L
V
L
C
k
p
k
p
k
p
k
J
k
C
k
C
k
C
k
C
k
C
k
J
L
Each dipole element p
k
con-
tributes to the lead voltage by
The toal lead voltage is the sum
of the lead voltage elements
V
k
=c
k
p
k
V
L
=c
k
p
k
k
J
I
J
I
J
I
J
L
J
L
s
I
R
=1A
I
R
V
L
V
L
V
L
= J
L
J
I
dv
1
s
Because of reciprocity, the field of lead vectors J
L
is the same as the current field J
L
raised by
feeding a reciprocal current of 1A to the lead.
The lead field may also be illustrated
with lead field current flow lines.
27-6 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
z
z
z
x
y
y
y
x
x
(a)
(b)
FIGURE 27.2 Sensitivity distributions, that is, lead elds of lead systems detecting (a) electric and (b) mag-
netic dipole moments of a volume source. The lead eld of the electric lead is shown both with vectors
representing the magnitude and direction of the lead eld (on the left) and with lead eld current ow lines
(on the right).
27.2.2 Lead Fields of Leads Detecting the Electric and Magnetic Dipole
Moments of a Volume Source
27.2.2.1 Electric Lead
The sensitivity of a lead systemthat detects the electric dipole moment of a volume source consists of three
orthogonal components (Figure 27.2a). Each of these is linear and homogeneous. In other words, one
component of the electric dipole moment is detected when the corresponding component of all elements
of the impressed current density

J
i
are detected with the same sensitivity throughout the source area.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Biomagnetism 27-7
27.2.2.2 Magnetic Lead
The sensitivity distribution of a lead system that detects the magnetic dipole moment of a volume source
ivity is always tangentially oriented around the symmetry axis (the coordinate axis). The magnitude of the
sensitivity is proportional to the radial distance from the symmetry axis and is zero on the symmetry axis.
27.2.3 Independence of Dipolar Electric and Magnetic Leads
27.2.3.1 Electric Lead
The sensitivity distributions of the three components of the lead system detecting the electric dipole
moment of a volume source are orthogonal. This means that none of them can be obtained as a linear
combination of the two other ones. (Note that any fourth measurement having a similar linear sensitivity
distribution would always be a linear combination of the three previous ones.) Thus the sensitivity
distributions, that is, the leads, are orthogonal and thus independent. However, because the three electric
signals are only different aspects of the same volume source, they are not (fully) independent.
27.2.3.2 Magnetic Lead
The sensitivity distributions of the three components of the lead system detecting the magnetic dipole
moment of a volume source are also orthogonal, meaning that no one of them can be obtained as a linear
combination of the two other ones. Thus, similarly, as in measurement of the electric dipole moment,
the sensitivity distributions, that is, the leads, are orthogonal and thus independent. However, because
the three magnetic signals are only different aspects of the same volume source, they are not (fully)
independent.
On the basis of the sensitivity distributions, we also can similarly explain the independence between
the electric and magnetic signals. According to Helmholtzs theorem, the electric leads are orthogonal to
the three magnetic leads. This means that none of these six leads can be obtained as a linear combination
of the other ve. However, the six signals, which they measure, are not independent because they arise
from the same electrically active volume source.
27.3 Magnetocardiography
27.3.1 Selection of the Source Model for MCG
In ECG and MCG it is the clinical problem to solve the inverse problem, that is, to solve the source of the
detected signal in order to get information about the anatomy and physiology of the source. Although
the actual clinical diagnostic procedure is based on measuring certain parameters, such as time intervals
and amplitudes, from the detected signal and actually not to display the components of the source, the
selection of the source model is very important from the point of view of available information.
In clinical ECG, the source model is a dipole. This is the model for both the 12-lead ECG and vectorcar-
diography (VCG). In 12-lead ECG, the volume conductor (thorax) model is not considered, which causes
considerable distortion of the leads. In VCG, only the form of the volume conductor is modeled. This
decreases the distortion in the lead elds but does not eliminate it completely. Note that today the display
systems used in these ECG and VCG systems do not play any role in the diagnostic procedure because the
computerized diagnosis is always based on the signals, not on the display.
In selection of the source model for MCG, it is logical, at least initially, to select the magnetic source
model to be on the same theoretical level with the ECG. Only in this way is it possible to compare the
diagnostic performance of these methods. It is clear, of course, that if the source model is more accurate,
that is, has more independent variables, the diagnostic performance is better, but when comparing ECG
and MCG, the comparison is relevant only if their complexity is similar [Malmivuo and Plonsey, 1995].
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
also consists of three orthogonal components (Figure 27.2b). Each of these has such a formthat the sensit-
27-8 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
x
z
y
x
z
y
(b) (a)
FIGURE 27.3 Measurement of the three orthogonal components of the magnetic dipole moment of the heart
(a) on the coordinate axis (xyz lead system) and (b) at a single location over and under the chest (unipositional lead
system).
27.3.2 Detection of the Equivalent Magnetic Dipole of the Heart
The basic detectionmethodof the equivalent magnetic dipole moment of a volume source is tomeasure the
magnetic eld on each coordinate axis in the direction of that axis. To idealize the sensitivity distribution
throughout the volume source, the measurements must be made at a distance that is large compared with
the source dimensions. This, of course, decreases the signal amplitude. The quality of the measurement
may be increased considerably if bipolar measurements are used; that is, measurements are made on
both sides of the source. Measurement of the magnetic eld on each coordinate axis is, however, difcult
to perform in MCG due to the geometry of the human body. It would require either six sequential
measurements with one magnetometer (dewar) or six simultaneous measurements using six dewars
(Figure 27.3).
It has been shown [Malmivuo, 1976] that all three components of the magnetic dipole also can be
measured froma single location. Applying this unipositional method symmetrically so that measurements
are made on both the anterior and posterior sides of the thorax at the same distance from the heart, only
distributions in nonsymmetrical and symmetrical measurements [Malmivuo and Plonsey, 1995].
27.3.3 Diagnostic Performance of ECG and MCG
The diagnostic performances of ECG and MCG were compared in an extensive study made at the Ragnar
Granit Institute [Oja, 1993]. The study was made using the asymmetrical unipositional lead system, that is,
making measurements only on the anterior side of the thorax. The patient material was selected, however,
so that myocardial changes were located dominantly on the anterior side.
This study consisted of 290 normal subjects and 259 patients with different myocardial disorders.
It was found that the diagnostic performance of ECG and MCG is about the same (83%). Diagnostic
parameters were then selected from both ECG and MCG. With this combined method, called electromag-
netocardiogram(EMCG), a diagnostic performance of 90%was obtained. This improvement in diagnostic
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
twodewars are neededanda very highquality of leadelds is obtained. Figure 27.4 illustrates the sensitivity
Biomagnetism 27-9
FIGURE 27.4 Sensitivity distributions in the measurement of the magnetic dipole moment of the heart. (a) Non-
symmetrical and (b) symmetrical measurements of the x component. (c) Symmetrical measurement of the y and z
components.
performance was obtained without increasing the number of parameters used in the diagnostic proced-
ure. Moreover, this improvement is signicant because it means that the number of incorrectly diagnosed
patients was reduced by approximately 50%.
This important result may be explained as follows: The lead system recording the electric dipole
moment of the volume source has three independent leads. (This is also the case in the 12-lead ECG
system.) Similarly, the lead system detecting the magnetic dipole moment of the volume source has
three independent leads. Therefore, the diagnostic performances of these methods are about the same.
However, because the sensitivity distributions of electric and magnetic leads are different, the patient
groups diagnosed correctly with both methods are not identical.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
100
200
300
400
500
1000
2000
3000
4000
Maximum
sensitivity
Surface of the thorax
Half-sensitivity
volume
4000
J
LM
[pA/m
2
]
3000
2000
1000
500
400
300
100
0
J
LM
[pA/m
2
]
Zero sensitivity line
h [mm]
150
100
50
30
0
56 mm
60 40 20 20 40 60
r [mm]
Magnetometer coil r =10 mm
1 A/sec
0
27-10 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
FIGURE 27.4 Continued.
As stated before, the electric leads are independent of the magnetic leads. If the diagnostic procedure
simultaneously uses both the ECG and the MCG leads, we obtain 3 + 3 = 6 independent leads, and the
correctly diagnosed patient groups may be combined. Thus the diagnostic performance of the combined
method is better than that of either method alone. This is the rst large-scale statistically relevant study
of the clinical diagnostic performance of biomagnetism.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
60 40 20 20 40
r [mm]
Magnetometer coil r =10mm
1 A/sec
0
Surface of the thorax in
anterior measurement
Surface of the thorax in
posterior measurement
Half-
sensitivity
volume
Maximum
sensitivity
Symmetry
plane
500 300 100 100 300
56 mm
400 600
500
200 0 200 400 600
J
LM
[pA/m
2
]
0
30
50
100
170
150
200
250
h [mm]
Zero sensitivity line
0
Biomagnetism 27-11
FIGURE 27.4 Continued.
27.3.4 Technical Reasons to Use the MCG
The technical differences between ECG and MCG include the MCGs far better ability to record static
sources, sources on the posterior side of the heart, monitor the fetal heart, and perform electrodeless
recording. As a technical drawback, it should be mentioned that the MCG instrument costs 2 to 3 times
more. An important feature of MCG is that, unlike the MEG instrument, it does not need a magnetically
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Magnetometer coil r =10 mm
I
r
=2 A/sec
60
0
30
50
100
150
170
200
250
40 20 20 40 60
z [mm]
h [mm]
Sensitivity
is cylindrically
around the zero
sensitivity line
Symmetry
plane of
the coils
Half-
sensitivity
volume
Zero
sensitivity
line
56 mm
J [pA/m
2
]
Maximum
sensitivity
800
600
400
200
0
200
400
600
800
700
500
500
700
300
300
100
100
Surface of the thorax in
anterior measurement
Surface of the thorax in
posterior measurement
symmetric
27-12 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
shielded room. This is very important because the shielded room is not only very expensive but also limits
application of the technique to a certain laboratory space.
27.3.5 Theoretical Reasons to Use the MCG
It has been shown that MCG has clinical value and that it can be used either alone or in combination with
ECG as a new technique called the electromagnetocardiogram (EMCG). The diagnostic performance of
the combined method is better than that of either ECG or MCG alone. With the combined method, the
number of incorrectly diagnosed patients may be reduced by approximately 50%.
27.4 Magnetoencephalography
Similarly as in the cardiac applications, in the magnetic measurement of the electric activity of the brain,
the benets and drawbacks of the MEG can be divided into theoretical and technical ones. First, the
theoretical aspects are discussed.
The two main theoretical aspects in favor of MEG are that it is believed that because the skull is
transparent for magnetic elds, the MEG should be able to concentrate its measurement sensitivity in
a smaller region than the EEG, and that the sensitivity distribution of these methods are fundamentally
different. These questions are discussed in the following: The analysis is made using the classic spherical
head model introduced by Rush and Driscoll [1969]. In this model, the head is represented with three
concentric spheres, where the outer radii of the scalp, skull, and brain are 92, 85, and 80 mm, respectively.
The resistivities of the scalp and the brain are 2.22 cm, and that of the skull is 80 times higher, being
177 cm.
The two basic magnetometer constructions in use in MEG are axial and planar gradiometers. In the
former, both coils are coaxial, and in the latter, they are coplanar. The minimum distance of the coil from
the scalp in a superconducting magnetometer is about 20 mm. The coil radius is usually about 10 mm.
It has been shown [Malmivuo and Plonsey, 1995] that with this measurement distance, decreasing the
coil radius does not change the distribution of the sensitivity in the brain region. In the following the
sensitivity distribution of these gradiometer constructions is discussed.
To indicate the magnetometers ability to concentrate its sensitivity to a small region, the concept of
half-sensitivity volume has been dened. This concept means the region in the source area (brain) where
the detector sensitivity is one-half or more from the maximum sensitivity. The smaller the half-sensitivity
volume, the better is the detectors ability to focus its sensitivity to a small region.
In magnetocardiography, it is relevant to detect the magnetic dipole moment of the volume source of
the heart and to make the sensitivity distribution within the heart region as independent of the position
in the axial direction as possible. In magnetoencephalography, however, the primary purpose is to detect
the electric activity of the cortex and to localize the regions of certain activity.
27.4.1 Sensitivity Distribution of the Axial Magnetometer
In a cylindrically symmetrical volume conductor model, the lead eld ow lines are concentric circles and
do not cut the discontinuity boundaries. Therefore, the sensitivity distribution in the brain area of the
spherical model equals that in an innite, homogeneous volume conductor.
trates the lead eld ow lines. The dashed lines join the points where the sensitivity has the same value,
being thus so-called isosensitivity lines. The half-sensitivity volume is represented by the shaded region.
27.4.2 Sensitivity Distribution of the Planar Gradiometer
illustrate the lead eld owlines, and the dashed lines represent the isosensitivity lines. The half-sensitivity
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Figure 27.5 illustrates the sensitivity distribution of an axial magnetometer. The thin solid lines illus-
Figure 27.6 illustrates the sensitivity distribution of a planar gradiometer. Again, the thin solid lines
Biomagnetism 27-13
FIGURE 27.5 Sensitivity distribution of the axial magnetometer in measuring the MEG (spherical lead model).
volume is representedby the shadedregion. The sensitivity of the planar gradiometer is concentratedunder
the center of the two coils and is mainly linearly oriented. Further, there exist two zero-sensitivity lines.
27.4.3 Half-Sensitivity Volumes of Electro- and Magnetoencephalography
Leads
The half-sensitivity volumes for different EEG and MEG leads as a function of electrode distance and
achieved with the shortest distance/baseline. For three- and two-electrode EEG leads, the half-sensitivity
volumes at 1 degree of electrode distance are 0.2 and 1.2 cm
3
, respectively. For 10-mm-radius planar and
axial gradiometer MEG leads, these volumes at 1 degree of coil separation (i.e., 1.6-mm baseline for axial
gradiometer) are 3.4 and 21.8 cm
3
, respectively.
The 20-mm coil distance from scalp and 10-mm coil radii are realistic for the helmet-like whole-head
MEG detector. There exist, however, MEG devices for recording at a limited region where the coil distance
and the coil radii are on the order of 1 mm. Therefore, the half-sensitivity volumes for planar gradiometers
with 1-mm coil radius at 0- to 20-mm recording distances are also illustrated in Figure 27.7. These curves
show that when the recording distance is about 12 mm and the distance/baseline is 1 mm, such a planar
gradiometer has about the same half-sensitivity volume as the two-electrode EEG.
Short separation will, of course, also decrease the signal amplitude. An optimal value is about 10 degrees
of separation. Increasing the separation to 10 degrees increases the EEG and MEG signal amplitudes to
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
gradiometer baselines are shown in Figure 27.7. The minimum half-sensitivity volume is, of course,
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100
1 A/sec
x [mm]
Planar gradiometer
coil radius=10 mm
Coil distance from
scalp=20 mm
Maximum
sensitivity
Half-sensitivity
volume
z
y
x
10
20
30
40
50
100
150
200
h [mm]
10
2
0
Zero sensitivity line
J
LM
[pA/m
2
]
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
3
27-14 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
FIGURE 27.6 Sensitivity distribution of the planar gradiometer (half-space model).
approximately 70 to 80% of their maximum value, but the half-sensitivity volumes do not increase
considerably from their values at 1 degree of separation.
Thus, contrary to general belief, the EEG has a better ability to focus its sensitivity to a small region in
the brain than the whole-head MEG. At about 20 to 30 degrees of separation, the two-electrode EEG lead
needs slightly smaller separationto achieve the same half-sensitivity volume as the planar gradiometer. The
sensitivity distributions of these leads are, however, very similar. Note that if the sensitivity distributions
of two different lead systems, whether they are electric or magnetic, are the same, they detect exactly the
same source and produce exactly the same signal. Therefore, the planar gradiometer and two-electrode
EEG lead detect very similar source distributions.
27.4.4 Sensitivity of EEG and MEG to Radial and Tangential Sources
The three-electrode EEGhas its maximumsensitivity under that electrode which forms the terminal alone.
This sensitivity is mainly directed radially to the spherical head model. With short electrode distances, the
sensitivity of the two-electrode EEG is directed mainly tangentially to the spherical head model. Thus
with the EEG it is possible to detect sources in all three orthogonal directions, that is, in the radial and in
the two tangential directions, in relation to the spherical head model.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
100 80 60 40
10
4
10
4 10
3
10
2
10
0
10
10
2
Zero sensitivity line
Zero sensitivity line
10
2
10
3
10
5 10
4
20 0 20 40 60 80 100
1 A/sec
x [mm]
Planar gradiometer
Coil radius =10 mm
Coil distance from
plane=20 mm
Maximum
sensitivity
Half-sensitivity
volume
z
y
x
Scalp
Skull
J
LM
[pA/m
2
]
J
LM
[pA/m
2
]
J
LM
[pA/m
2
]
200
150
100
50
40
30
20
10
h [mm]
35,27
10
0
Biomagnetism 27-15
FIGURE 27.7 Half-sensitivity volumes of different EEG leads (dashed lines) and MEG leads (solid lines) as a function
of electrode distance and gradiometer baseline, respectively.
In the axial gradiometer MEG lead, the sensitivity is directed tangentially to the gradiometer symmetry
axis and thus also tangentially to the spherical head model. In the planar gradiometer, the sensitivity has
its maximum under the center of the coils and is directed mainly linearly and tangentially to the spherical
head model. The MEG lead elds are oriented tangentially to the spherical head model everywhere. This
may be easily understood by recognizing that the lead eld current does not ow through the surface of
the head because no electrodes are used. Therefore, the MEG can only detect sources oriented in the two
tangential directions in relation to the spherical head model.
References
Baule, G.M. and McFee, R. 1963. Detection of the magnetic eld of the heart. Am. Heart J. 55: 95.
Cohen, D. 1968. Magnetoencephalography: evidence of magnetic elds produced by alpha-rhythm
currents. Science 161: 784.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Half-sensitivity volume [cm
3
]
Axial
gradiometer
21.8 cm
3
Planar gradiometer
h=10 mm r =10 mm
h=20 mm
15 mm
10 mm
0 mm
r =1 mm
r =10 mm
r =10 mm r =1 mm
0 10
10
20 30 [mm]
2

E
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
s
2 Electrodes 1+2 Electrodes
+

+
Coil distance
from scalp
h=20 mm
h=020 mm
Axial gradiometer Planar gradiometer
Electrode distance/gradiometer baseline
1
+
2
E
le
c
tr
o
d
e
s
5
0
(a)
(b) (c)
(d) (e)
[0] 20
27-16 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
Geselowitz, D.B. 1967. On bioelectric potentials in an inhomogeneous volume conductor. Biophys. J. 7: 1.
Geselowitz, D.B. 1970. On the magnetic eld generated outside an inhomogeneous volume conductor by
internal current sources. IEEE Trans. Magn. MAG-6: 346.
Helmholtz, H.L.F. 1853. Ueber einige Gesetze der Vertheilung elektrischer Strme in krperlichen Leitern
mit Anwendung auf die thierisch-elektrischen Versuche. Ann. Physik. Chem. 89: 211.
Malmivuo, J. and Plonsey, R. 1995. Bioelectromagnetism: Principles and Applications of Bioelectric and
Biomagnetic Fields. New York, Oxford University Press.
Malmivuo, J.A. 1976. On the detection of the magnetic heart vector: An application of the reciprocity
theorem. Acta Polytechnol. Scand. 39: 112.
Maxwell, J. 1865. A dynamical theory of the electromagnetic eld. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. (Lond.) 155: 459.
More, P.M. and Feshbach, H. 1953. Methods of Theoretical Physics, Part I. New York, McGraw-Hill.
Oja, O.S. 1993. Vector magnetocardiogram in myocardial disorders, M.D. thesis, University of Tampere,
Medical Faculty.
rsted, H.C. 1820. Experimenta circa effectum conictus electrici in acum magneticam. J. F. Chem. Phys.
29: 275.
Plonsey, R. and Collin, R. 1961. Principles and Applications of Electromagnetic Fields. New York, McGraw-
Hill.
Rush, S. and Driscoll, D.A. 1969. EEG-electrode sensitivity: An application of reciprocity. IEEE Trans.
Biomed. Eng. BME-16: 15.
Zimmerman, J.E., Thiene, P., and Hardings, J. 1970. Design and operation of stable rf biased
superconducting point-contact quantum devices. J. Appl. Phys. 41: 1572.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC