Effects of visual-electrotactile stimulation feedback on brain functional connectivity during motor imagery practice.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 10 2023
18 10 2023
Historique:
received:
01
06
2023
accepted:
10
10
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
19
10
2023
entrez:
18
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The use of neurofeedback is an important aspect of effective motor rehabilitation as it offers real-time sensory information to promote neuroplasticity. However, there is still limited knowledge about how the brain's functional networks reorganize in response to such feedback. To address this gap, this study investigates the reorganization of the brain network during motor imagery tasks when subject to visual stimulation or visual-electrotactile stimulation feedback. This study can provide healthcare professionals with a deeper understanding of the changes in the brain network and help develop successful treatment approaches for brain-computer interface-based motor rehabilitation applications. We examine individual edges, nodes, and the entire network, and use the minimum spanning tree algorithm to construct a brain network representation using a functional connectivity matrix. Furthermore, graph analysis is used to detect significant features in the brain network that might arise in response to the feedback. Additionally, we investigate the power distribution of brain activation patterns using power spectral analysis and evaluate the motor imagery performance based on the classification accuracy. The results showed that the visual and visual-electrotactile stimulation feedback induced subject-specific changes in brain activation patterns and network reorganization in the [Formula: see text] band. Thus, the visual-electrotactile stimulation feedback significantly improved the integration of information flow between brain regions associated with motor-related commands and higher-level cognitive functions, while reducing cognitive workload in the sensory areas of the brain and promoting positive emotions. Despite these promising results, neither neurofeedback modality resulted in a significant improvement in classification accuracy, compared with the absence of feedback. These findings indicate that multimodal neurofeedback can modulate imagery-mediated rehabilitation by enhancing motor-cognitive communication and reducing cognitive effort. In future interventions, incorporating this technique to ease cognitive demands for participants could be crucial for maintaining their motivation to engage in rehabilitation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37853020
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-44621-6
pii: 10.1038/s41598-023-44621-6
pmc: PMC10584917
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
17752Informations de copyright
© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.
Références
World Health Organization. Disability and Health (2023).
Tong, Y. et al. Motor imagery-based rehabilitation: Potential neural correlates and clinical application for functional recovery of motor deficits after stroke. Aging Dis. 8, 364 (2017).
pubmed: 28580191
pmcid: 5440115
Ruffino, C., Papaxanthis, C. & Lebon, F. Neural plasticity during motor learning with motor imagery practice: Review and perspectives. Neuroscience 341, 61–78 (2017).
pubmed: 27890831
Pascual-Leone, A. et al. Modulation of muscle responses evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation during the acquisition of new fine motor skills. J. Neurophysiol. 74, 1037–1045 (1995).
pubmed: 7500130
Jackson, P. L., Lafleur, M. F., Malouin, F., Richards, C. & Doyon, J. Potential role of mental practice using motor imagery in neurologic rehabilitation. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 82, 1133–1141 (2001).
pubmed: 11494195
Wang, T., Mantini, D. & Gillebert, C. R. The potential of real-time fmri neurofeedback for stroke rehabilitation: A systematic review. Cortex 107, 148–165 (2018).
pubmed: 28992948
pmcid: 6182108
Hong, K.-S. & Khan, M. J. Hybrid brain–computer interface techniques for improved classification accuracy and increased number of commands: A review. Front. Neurorobot. 35, 1 (2017).
Achanccaray, D., Izumi, S.-I. & Hayashibe, M. Visual-electrotactile stimulation feedback to improve immersive brain–computer interface based on hand motor imagery. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2021, 1–13 (2021).
Mulvey, M. R., Fawkner, H. J., Radford, H. E. & Johnson, M. I. Perceptual embodiment of prosthetic limbs by transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Neuromodulation 15, 42–47 (2012).
Kauhanen, L. et al. Haptic feedback compared with visual feedback for bci. In Proc. 3rd International Brain–Computer Interface Workshop & Training Course 2006 (CONF, 2006).
Leeb, R. et al. Freeing the visual channel by exploiting vibrotactile bci feedback. In 2013 35th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) 3093–3096 (IEEE, 2013).
Isaković, M. et al. Electrotactile feedback improves performance and facilitates learning in the routine grasping task. Eur. J. Transl. Myol. 26, 3 (2016).
Bhattacharyya, S., Clerc, M. & Hayashibe, M. Augmenting motor imagery learning for brain–computer interfacing using electrical stimulation as feedback. IEEE Trans. Med. Robot. Bion. 1, 247–255 (2019).
Stefano Filho, C. A., Attux, R. & Castellano, G. Motor imagery practice and feedback effects on functional connectivity. J. Neural Eng. 18, 066048 (2022).
Nakayashiki, K., Saeki, M., Takata, Y., Hayashi, Y. & Kondo, T. Modulation of event-related desynchronization during kinematic and kinetic hand movements. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 11, 1–9 (2014).
Terrasa, J. L. et al. Power spectral density and functional connectivity changes due to a sensorimotor neurofeedback training: A preliminary study. Neural Plast. 2019, 1 (2019).
Pfurtscheller, G. & Da Silva, F. L. Event-related eeg/meg synchronization and desynchronization: Basic principles. Clin. Neurophysiol. 110, 1842–1857 (1999).
pubmed: 10576479
Ulanov, M. & Shtyrov, Y. Oscillatory beta/alpha band modulations: A potential biomarker of functional language and motor recovery in chronic stroke? Front. Hum. Neurosci. 16, 940845 (2022).
pubmed: 36226263
pmcid: 9549964
Bassett, D. S. & Sporns, O. Network neuroscience. Nat. Neurosci. 20, 353–364 (2017).
pubmed: 28230844
pmcid: 5485642
Ghosh, P., Mazumder, A., Bhattacharyya, S., Tibarewala, D. N. & Hayashibe, M. Functional connectivity analysis of motor imagery eeg signal for brain–computer interfacing application. In 2015 7th International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering (NER) 210–213 (IEEE, 2015).
Gonzalez-Astudillo, J., Cattai, T., Bassignana, G., Corsi, M.-C. & Fallani, F. D. V. Network-based brain–computer interfaces: Principles and applications. J. Neural Eng. 18, 011001 (2021).
Stam, C. J. Modern network science of neurological disorders. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 15, 683–695 (2014).
Park, H.-J. & Friston, K. Structural and functional brain networks: From connections to cognition. Science 342, 1238411 (2013).
Bullmore, E. & Sporns, O. Complex brain networks: Graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 10, 186–198 (2009).
Mheich, A., Wendling, F. & Hassan, M. Brain network similarity: Methods and applications. Netw. Neurosci. 4, 507–527 (2020).
pmcid: 7462433
Bastos, A. M. & Schoffelen, J.-M. A tutorial review of functional connectivity analysis methods and their interpretational pitfalls. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 9, 175 (2016).
pmcid: 4705224
Zalesky, A., Fornito, A. & Bullmore, E. T. Network-based statistic: Identifying differences in brain networks. Neuroimage 53, 1197–1207 (2010).
Adamovich, T., Zakharov, I., Tabueva, A. & Malykh, S. The thresholding problem and variability in the eeg graph network parameters. Sci. Rep. 12, 18659 (2022).
pmcid: 9636266
Tewarie, P., van Dellen, E., Hillebrand, A. & Stam, C. J. The minimum spanning tree: An unbiased method for brain network analysis. Neuroimage 104, 177–188 (2015).
Stam, C. et al. The trees and the forest: Characterization of complex brain networks with minimum spanning trees. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 92, 129–138 (2014).
pubmed: 24726900
Borgheai, S. B., McLinden, J., Mankodiya, K. & Shahriari, Y. Frontal functional network disruption associated with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: An fnirs-based minimum spanning tree analysis. Front. Neurosci. 14, 613990 (2020).
pubmed: 33424544
pmcid: 7785833
Blomsma, N. et al. Minimum spanning tree analysis of brain networks: A systematic review of network size effects, sensitivity for neuropsychiatric pathology, and disorder specificity. Netw. Neurosci. 6, 301–319 (2022).
pubmed: 35733422
pmcid: 9207994
Boersma, M. et al. Growing trees in child brains: Graph theoretical analysis of electroencephalography-derived minimum spanning tree in 5-and 7-year-old children reflects brain maturation. Brain Connect. 3, 50–60 (2013).
pubmed: 23106635
Demuru, M., Fara, F. & Fraschini, M. Brain network analysis of eeg functional connectivity during imagery hand movements. J. Integr. Neurosci. 12, 441–447 (2013).
Luo, Z., Lu, X. & Xi, X. Eeg feature extraction based on a bilevel network: Minimum spanning tree and regional network. Electronics 9, 203 (2020).
Marzbani, H., Marateb, H. R. & Mansourian, M. Neurofeedback: A comprehensive review on system design, methodology and clinical applications. Basic Clin. Neurosci. 7, 143 (2016).
pubmed: 27303609
pmcid: 4892319
Wang, Z. et al. A bci based visual-haptic neurofeedback training improves cortical activations and classification performance during motor imagery. J. Neural Eng. 16, 066012 (2019).
pubmed: 31365911
Schirrmeister, R. T. et al. Deep learning with convolutional neural networks for eeg decoding and visualization. Hum. Brain Mapp. 38, 5391–5420 (2017).
pubmed: 28782865
pmcid: 5655781
Foxe, J. J. & Snyder, A. C. The role of alpha-band brain oscillations as a sensory suppression mechanism during selective attention. Front. Psychol. 2, 154 (2011).
pubmed: 21779269
pmcid: 3132683
Garry, M. I., Kamen, G. & Nordstrom, M. A. Hemispheric differences in the relationship between corticomotor excitability changes following a fine-motor task and motor learning. J. Neurophysiol. 91, 1570–1578 (2004).
pubmed: 14627660
Neuper, C., Schlögl, A. & Pfurtscheller, G. Enhancement of left–right sensorimotor eeg differences during feedback-regulated motor imagery. J. Clin. Neurophysiol. 16, 373–382 (1999).
Harmon-Jones, E., Gable, P. A. & Peterson, C. K. The role of asymmetric frontal cortical activity in emotion-related phenomena: A review and update. Biol. Psychol. 84, 451–462 (2010).
Mennella, R., Patron, E. & Palomba, D. Frontal alpha asymmetry neurofeedback for the reduction of negative affect and anxiety. Behav. Res. Ther. 92, 32–40 (2017).
Nagel, S. & Spüler, M. World’s fastest brain–computer interface: Combining eeg2code with deep learning. PLoS ONE 14, e0221909 (2019).
pmcid: 6730910
Orndorff-Plunkett, F., Singh, F., Aragón, O. R. & Pineda, J. A. Assessing the effectiveness of neurofeedback training in the context of clinical and social neuroscience. Brain Sci. 7, 95 (2017).
pmcid: 5575615
Fleury, M., Lioi, G., Barillot, C. & Lécuyer, A. A survey on the use of haptic feedback for brain–computer interfaces and neurofeedback. Front. Neurosci. 14, 528 (2020).
pmcid: 7325479
Gomez-Rodriguez, M. et al. Closing the sensorimotor loop: Haptic feedback facilitates decoding of motor imagery. J. Neural Eng. 8, 036005 (2011).
Boersma, M. et al. Network analysis of resting state eeg in the developing young brain: Structure comes with maturation. Hum. Brain Mapp. 32, 413–425 (2011).
Bullmore, E. & Sporns, O. The economy of brain network organization. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 13, 336–349 (2012).
Babaeeghazvini, P., Rueda-Delgado, L. M., Gooijers, J., Swinnen, S. P. & Daffertshofer, A. Brain structural and functional connectivity: A review of combined works of diffusion magnetic resonance imaging and electro-encephalography. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 15, 721206 (2021).
pmcid: 8529047
Qin, Y. et al. Probing the functional and structural connectivity underlying eeg traveling waves. Brain Topogr. 1, 1–13 (2021).
Coppi, E. et al. Age-related changes in motor cortical representation and interhemispheric interactions: A transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Front. Aging Neurosci. 6, 209 (2014).
pmcid: 4128298
Tomasi, D. & Volkow, N. D. Aging and functional brain networks. Mol. Psychiatry 17, 549–558 (2012).
Willems, R. M., Toni, I., Hagoort, P. & Casasanto, D. Body-specific motor imagery of hand actions: Neural evidence from right-and left-handers. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 39, 1 (2009).
Tomasi, D. & Volkow, N. D. Gender differences in brain functional connectivity density. Hum. Brain Mapp. 33, 849–860 (2012).
Gong, G., He, Y. & Evans, A. C. Brain connectivity: Gender makes a difference. Neuroscientist 17, 575–591 (2011).
Stam, C. J., Nolte, G. & Daffertshofer, A. Phase lag index: Assessment of functional connectivity from multi channel eeg and meg with diminished bias from common sources. Hum. Brain Mapp. 28, 1178–1193 (2007).
pubmed: 17266107
pmcid: 6871367
Kotte, S. & Dabbakuti, J. K. Methods for removal of artifacts from eeg signal: A review. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1706, 012093 (2020).
Vinck, M., Oostenveld, R., Van Wingerden, M., Battaglia, F. & Pennartz, C. M. An improved index of phase-synchronization for electrophysiological data in the presence of volume-conduction, noise and sample-size bias. Neuroimage 55, 1548–1565 (2011).
Blankertz, B., Tomioka, R., Lemm, S., Kawanabe, M. & Muller, K.-R. Optimizing spatial filters for robust eeg single-trial analysis. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 25, 41–56 (2007).
Suo, T., Liu, L., Chen, C. & Zhang, E. The functional role of individual-alpha based frontal asymmetry in the evaluation of emotional pictures: Evidence from event-related potentials. Front. Psychol. 8, 180 (2017).
Li, A. et al. mne-connectivity (2022).
Prim, R. C. Shortest connection networks and some generalizations. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 36, 1389–1401 (1957).
Kruskal, J. B. On the shortest spanning subtree of a graph and the traveling salesman problem. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 7, 48–50 (1956).
Bressler, S. L. & Menon, V. Large-scale brain networks in cognition: Emerging methods and principles. Trends Cogn. Sci. 14, 277–290 (2010).
pubmed: 20493761
Abraham, A. et al. Machine learning for neuroimaging with scikit-learn. Front. Neuroinform. 8, 14 (2014).
pmcid: 3930868
Hagberg, A., Swart, P. & Chult, D. Exploring Network Structure, Dynamics, and Function Using Network. Tech. Rep. (Los Alamos National Lab, 2008).
Achanccaray, D. & Hayashibe, M. Decoding hand motor imagery tasks within the same limb from eeg signals using deep learning. IEEE Trans. Med. Robot. Bionics 2, 692–699 (2020).
Phunruangsakao, C., Achanccaray, D., Izumi, S.-I. & Hayashibe, M. Multibranch convolutional neural network with contrastive representation learning for decoding same limb motor imagery tasks. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 16, 1032724 (2022).
pmcid: 9792600
Ang, K. K., Chin, Z. Y., Zhang, H. & Guan, C. Filter bank common spatial pattern (fbcsp) in brain-computer interface. In 2008 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence) 2390–2397 (IEEE, 2008).
Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Methodol.) 57, 289–300 (1995).