title: Potential for unreliable interpretation of EEG recorded with microelectrodes.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Recent studies in epilepsy, cognition, and brain machine interfaces have shown the utility of recording intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) with greater spatial resolution. Many of these studies utilize microelectrodes connected to specialized amplifiers that are optimized for such recordings. We recently measured the impedances of several commercial microelectrodes and demonstrated that they will distort iEEG signals if connected to clinical EEG amplifiers commonly used in most centers. In this study we demonstrate the clinical implications of this effect and identify some of the potential difficulties in using microelectrodes.
  
  
  METHODS
  Human iEEG data were digitally filtered to simulate the signal recorded by a hybrid grid (two macroelectrodes and eight microelectrodes) connected to a standard EEG amplifier. The filtered iEEG data were read by three trained epileptologists, and high frequency oscillations (HFOs) were detected with a well-known algorithm. The filtering method was verified experimentally by recording an injected EEG signal in a saline bath with the same physical acquisition system used to generate the model. Several electrodes underwent scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Macroelectrode recordings were unaltered compared to the source iEEG signal, but microelectrodes attenuated low frequencies. The attenuated signals were difficult to interpret: all three clinicians changed their clinical scoring of slowing and seizures when presented with the same data recorded on different sized electrodes. The HFO detection algorithm was oversensitive with microelectrodes, classifying many more HFOs than when the same data were recorded with macroelectrodes. In addition, during experimental recordings the microelectrodes produced much greater noise as well as large baseline fluctuations, creating sharply contoured transients, and superimposed "false" HFOs. SEM of these microelectrodes demonstrated marked variability in exposed electrode surface area, lead fractures, and sharp edges.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Microelectrodes should not be used with low impedance (<1 GΩ) amplifiers due to severe signal attenuation and variability that changes clinical interpretations. The current method of preparing microelectrodes can leave sharp edges and nonuniform amounts of exposed wire. Even when recorded with higher impedance amplifiers, microelectrode data are highly prone to artifacts that are difficult to interpret. Great care must be taken when analyzing iEEG from high impedance microelectrodes.
authors: Department of Neurology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-5036, USA. william.stacey@umich.edu
authors: William C
authors: WC
authors: Stacey
authors: Spencer
authors: S
authors: Kellis
authors: Bradley
authors: B
authors: Greger
authors: Christopher R
authors: CR
authors: Butson
authors: Paras R
authors: PR
authors: Patel
authors: Trevor
authors: T
authors: Assaf
authors: Temenuzhka
authors: T
authors: Mihaylova
authors: Simon
authors: S
authors: Glynn
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D016477:Artifacts; D001921:Brain / Q000502:physiology*; D001931:Brain Mapping; D058256:Brain Waves / Q000502:physiology; D016208:Databases, Factual / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017097:Electric Impedance; D004569:Electroencephalography / Q000379:methods*; D001330:Electronic Data Processing; D004827:Epilepsy / Q000175:diagnosis*; D006801:Humans; D008839:Microelectrodes
keywords: Electrocorticography; Electrodes; High frequency oscillations; Impedance
references: J Neurophysiol. 2010 Nov;104(5):2900-12
references: 20810694
references: Brain. 2009 Nov;132(Pt 11):3047-59
references: 19745024
references: Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Sep;122(9):1701-5
references: 21429792
references: Nature. 2006 Jul 13;442(7099):164-71
references: 16838014
references: Prog Neurobiol. 2012 Sep;98(3):265-78
references: 22420981
references: Neurology. 2009 Sep 15;73(11):843-6
references: 19752450
references: Nature. 2005 Jun 23;435(7045):1102-7
references: 15973409
references: Brain. 2011 Oct;134(Pt 10):2948-59
references: 21903727
references: J Neurosci. 2010 Jun 9;30(23):7770-82
references: 20534826
references: Ann Neurol. 2002 Oct;52(4):407-15
references: 12325068
references: Nat Clin Pract Neurol. 2007 Aug;3(8):444-52
references: 17671522
references: J Neural Eng. 2012 Dec;9(6):065003
references: 23186948
references: Nat Neurosci. 2011 May;14(5):635-41
references: 21441925
references: Neurosurg Focus. 2008 Sep;25(3):E23
references: 18759625
references: J Clin Neurophysiol. 2010 Dec;27(6):406-11
references: 21076338
references: Nat Commun. 2012;3:1060
references: 22968706
references: J Neurophysiol. 2007 Mar;97(3):2525-32
references: 17021032
references: Brain. 2010 Sep;133(9):2789-97
references: 20685804
references: Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2006;2006:4594-7
references: 17946639
references: Clin Neurophysiol. 2007 Aug;118(8):1744-52
references: 17544322
references: J Neurophysiol. 2002 Oct;88(4):1743-52
references: 12364503
references: J Neural Eng. 2012 Oct;9(5):056007
references: 22878608