Matching Items (2)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

154164-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Epilepsy is a group of disorders that cause seizures in approximately 2.2 million people in the United States. Over 30% of these patients have epilepsies that do not respond to treatment with anti-epileptic drugs. For this population, focal resection surgery could offer long-term seizure freedom. Surgery candidates undergo a myriad

Epilepsy is a group of disorders that cause seizures in approximately 2.2 million people in the United States. Over 30% of these patients have epilepsies that do not respond to treatment with anti-epileptic drugs. For this population, focal resection surgery could offer long-term seizure freedom. Surgery candidates undergo a myriad of tests and monitoring to determine where and when seizures occur. The “gold standard” method for focus identification involves the placement of electrocorticography (ECoG) grids in the sub-dural space, followed by continual monitoring and visual inspection of the patient’s cortical activity. This process, however, is highly subjective and uses dated technology. Multiple studies were performed to investigate how the evaluation process could benefit from an algorithmic adjust using current ECoG technology, and how the use of new microECoG technology could further improve the process.

Computational algorithms can quickly and objectively find signal characteristics that may not be detectable with visual inspection, but many assume the data are stationary and/or linear, which biological data are not. An empirical mode decomposition (EMD) based algorithm was developed to detect potential seizures and tested on data collected from eight patients undergoing monitoring for focal resection surgery. EMD does not require linearity or stationarity and is data driven. The results suggest that a biological data driven algorithm could serve as a useful tool to objectively identify changes in cortical activity associated with seizures.

Next, the use of microECoG technology was investigated. Though both ECoG and microECoG grids are composed of electrodes resting on the surface of the cortex, changing the diameter of the electrodes creates non-trivial changes in the physics of the electrode-tissue interface that need to be accounted for. Experimenting with different recording configurations showed that proper grounding, referencing, and amplification are critical to obtain high quality neural signals from microECoG grids.

Finally, the relationship between data collected from the cortical surface with micro and macro electrodes was studied. Simultaneous recordings of the two electrode types showed differences in power spectra that suggest the inclusion of activity, possibly from deep structures, by macroelectrodes that is not accessible by microelectrodes.
ContributorsAshmont, Kari Rich (Author) / Greger, Bradley (Thesis advisor) / Helms Tillery, Stephen (Committee member) / Buneo, Christopher (Committee member) / Adelson, P David (Committee member) / Dudek, F Edward (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
137409-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Electromyography (EMG) and Electroencephalography (EEG) are techniques used to detect electrical activity produced by the human body. EMG detects electrical activity in the skeletal muscles, while EEG detects electrical activity from the scalp. The purpose of this study is to capture different types of EMG and EEG signals and to

Electromyography (EMG) and Electroencephalography (EEG) are techniques used to detect electrical activity produced by the human body. EMG detects electrical activity in the skeletal muscles, while EEG detects electrical activity from the scalp. The purpose of this study is to capture different types of EMG and EEG signals and to determine if the signals can be distinguished between each other and processed into output signals to trigger events in prosthetics. Results from the study suggest that the PSD estimates can be used to compare signals that have significant differences such as the wrist, scalp, and fingers, but it cannot fully distinguish between signals that are closely related, such as two different fingers. The signals that were identified were able to be translated into the physical output simulated on the Arduino circuit.
ContributorsJanis, William Edward (Author) / LaBelle, Jeffrey (Thesis director) / Santello, Marco (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Computer Science and Engineering Program (Contributor)
Created2013-12