Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A cable theory based biophysical model of resistance change in crab peripheral nerve and human cerebral cortex during neuronal depolarisation: implications for electrical impedance tomography of fast neural activity in the brain

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) is a medical imaging method with the potential to image resistance changes which occur during neuronal depolarisation in the brain with a resolution of milliseconds and millimetres. Most biomedical EIT is conducted with applied current over 10 kHz, as this reduces electrode impedance and so instrumentation artefact. However, impedance changes during neuronal depolarization are negligible at such frequencies. In order to estimate optimal recording frequency and specify instrumentation requirements, we have modelled their amplitude and frequency dependence during evoked activity using cable theory. Published values were used for the electrical properties and geometry of cell processes. The model was adjusted for the filtering effect of membrane capacitance and proportion of active neurons. At DC, resistance decreases by 2.8 % in crab nerve during the compound action potential and 0.6 % (range 0.06–1.7 %) locally in cerebral cortex during evoked physiological activity. Both predictions correlate well with independent experimental data. This encourages the view that true tomographic imaging of fast neural activity in the brain is possible, at least with epicortical electrodes in the first instance. It is essential to undertake this at low frequencies below about 100 Hz as above 1 kHz the signal becomes vanishingly small.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Araki T, Terzuolo CA (1962) Membrane currents in spinal motoneurons associated with the action potential and synaptic activity. J Neurophysiol 25:772–789

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Boone KG (1995) The possible use of applied potential tomography for imaging action potentials in the brain. University College London, London

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cole SK, Curtis HJ (1939) Electrical impedance of the squid giant axon during activity. J Gen Physiol 22:649–670

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Elul R (1967) Amplitude histograms of the EEG as an indicator of the cooperative behavior of neuron populations. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 23:87

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Freygang WH, Landau WM (1955) Some relations between resistivity and electrical activity in the cerebral cortex of the cat. J Cell Compar Physiol 45:377–392

    Google Scholar 

  6. Galambos R, Velluti R (1968) Evoked resistance shifts in unanesthetized cats. Exp Neurol 22:243–252

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Gilad O, Holder DS (2009) Impedance changes recorded with scalp electrodes during visual evoked responses: implications for electrical impedance tomography of fast neural activity. Neuroimage 47:514–522

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gilad O, Horesh L, Holder DS (2007) Design of electrodes and current limits for low frequency electrical impedance tomography of the brain. Med Biol Eng Comput 45:621–633

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gilad O, Ghosh A, Oh D, Holder DS (2009) A method for recording resistance changes non-invasively during neuronal depolarization with a view to imaging brain activity with electrical impedance tomography. J Neurosci Methods 180:87–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gilad O, Horesh L, Holder DS (2009) A modelling study to inform specification and optimal electrode placement for imaging of neuronal depolarization during visual evoked responses by electrical and magnetic detection impedance tomography. Physiol Meas 30:S201–S224

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Grech R, Cassar T, Muscat J, Camilleri KP, Fabri SG, Zervakis M, Xanthopoulos P, Sakkalis V, Vanrumste B (2008) Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil 5:25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hillman EM, Amoozegar CB, Wang T, McCaslin AF, Bouchard MB, Mansfield J, Levenson RM (2011) In vivo optical imaging and dynamic contrast methods for biomedical research. Philos Transact A Math Phys Eng Sci 369:4620–4643

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hodgkin AL (1947) The membrane resistance of a non-medullated nerve fibre. J Physiol 106:305–318

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hodgkin AL (1954) A note on conduction velocity. J Physiol 125:221–224

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hodgkin AL, Rushton WAH (1946) The electrical constants of a crustacean nerve fibre. In: Proceedings of the royal society of London series B, biological sciences (1934–1990), vol 133, pp 444–479

  16. Hofner N, Albrecht HH, Cassara AM, Curio G, Hartwig S, Haueisen J, Hilschenz I, Korber R, Martens S, Scheer HJ, Voigt J, Trahms L, Burghoff M (2011) Are brain currents detectable by means of low-field NMR? A phantom study. Magn Reson Imaging 29:1365–1373

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Holder DS (1987) Feasibility of developing a method of imaging neuronal activity in the human brain: a theoretical review. Med Biol Eng Comput 25:2–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Holder DS (1989) Impedance changes during evoked nervous activity in human subjects: implications for the application of applied potential tomography (APT) to imaging neuronal discharge. Clin Phys Physiol Meas 10:267–274

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Holder DS (2005) Electrical impedance tomography: methods, history and applications, 1st edn. Taylor and Francis, London

    Google Scholar 

  20. Holder DS, Gardner-Medwin AR (1988) Some possible neurological applications of applied potential tomography. Clin Phys Physiol Meas 9(Suppl A):111–119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Keynes RD (1951) The leakage of radioactive potassium from stimulated nerve. J Physiol 113:99–114

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Keynes RD, LEWIS PR (1951) The resting exchange of radioactive potassium in crab nerve. J Physiol 113:73–98

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim HJ, Kim YT, Minhas AS, Jeong WC, Woo EJ, Seo JK, Kwon OJ (2009) In vivo high-resolution conductivity imaging of the human leg using MREIT: the first human experiment. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 28:1681–1687

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Klivington KA, Galambos R (1967) Resistance shifts accompanying the evoked cortical response in the cat. Science 157:211–213

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Klivington KA, Galambos R (1968) Rapid resistance shifts in cat cortex during click-evoked responses. J Neurophysiol 31:565–573

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. McCann H, Polydorides N, Murrieta-Lee JC, Ge K, Beatty P, Pomfrett CJ (2006) Sub-second functional imaging by electrical impedance tomography. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 1:4269–4272

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Nicholson PW (1965) Specific impedance of cerebral white matter. Exp Neurol 13:386–401

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Ochs S (1956) The direct cortical response. J Neurophysiol 19:513–523

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Oh T, Gilad O, Ghosh A, Schuettler M, Holder DS (2011) A novel method for recording neuronal depolarization with recording at 125–825 Hz: implications for imaging fast neural activity in the brain with electrical impedance tomography. Med Biol Eng Comput 49:593–604

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Parkes LM, de Lange FP, Fries P, Toni I, Norris DG (2007) Inability to directly detect magnetic field changes associated with neuronal activity. Magn Reson Med 57:411–416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rafiei-Naeini M, McCann H (2008) Low-noise current excitation sub-system for medical EIT. Physiol Meas 29:S173–S184

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Rall W (1977) The Nervous System 1-Core conductor theory and cable properties of neurons. In: Kandel ER (ed) Part 1, cellular biology of neurons. Am Physiol Soc, Bethseda, MD, pp 39–97

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ranck JB Jr (1966) Electrical impedance in the subicular area of rats during paradoxical sleep. Exp Neurol 16:416–437

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ranck JB Jr (1963) Specific impedance of rabbit cerebral cortex. Exp Neurol 7:144–152

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ranck JB Jr (1963) Analysis of specific impedance of rabbit cerebral cortex. Exp Neurol 7:153–174

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sadleir RJ, Grant SC, Woo EJ (2010) Can high-field MREIT be used to directly detect neural activity? Theoretical considerations. Neuroimage 52:205–216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Segev I, Rall W (1998) Excitable dendrites and spines: earlier theoretical insights elucidate recent direct observations. Trends Neurosci 21:453–460

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Segev I, Schneidman E (1999) Axons as computing devices: basic insights gained from models. J Physiol Paris 93:263–270

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Taber KH, Hillman EM, Hurley RA (2010) Optical imaging: a new window to the adult brain. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 22:iv, 357–iv, 360

    Google Scholar 

  40. Van Harreveld A, Murphy T, Nobel KW (1963) Specific impedance of rabbit’s cortical tissue. Am J Physiol 205:203–207

    Google Scholar 

  41. Wolfe J, Houweling AR, Brecht M (2010) Sparse and powerful cortical spikes. Curr Opin Neurobiol 20:306–312

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Ori Gilad for reviewing the manuscript and for helpful suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Physics, University College London, London, UK

    Adam Liston, Richard Bayford & David Holder

  2. Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK

    Adam Liston

  3. Department of Natural Sciences, Middlesex University, London, UK

    Richard Bayford

Authors
  1. Adam Liston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard Bayford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Holder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Holder.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liston, A., Bayford, R. & Holder, D. A cable theory based biophysical model of resistance change in crab peripheral nerve and human cerebral cortex during neuronal depolarisation: implications for electrical impedance tomography of fast neural activity in the brain. Med Biol Eng Comput 50, 425–437 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-012-0901-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-012-0901-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation