Advertisement

The Environmentalist

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 134–139 | Cite as

Evolution of hybrid functional imaging in bioelectromagnetics research

  • John A. Robertson
  • Alex W. Thomas
  • Julien Modolo
  • Jodi Miller
  • Nicole Juen
  • Alexandre Legros
  • Frank S. Prato
Article

Abstract

The field of bioelectromagnetics, consisting of the study of the interaction between electromagnetic fields and biological systems, has been rapidly expanding in the recent years. One important factor that contributes importantly to the development of this field is the continuing advances in technology allowing researchers to investigate different endpoints, or to more precisely measure changes, if any. Hybrid functional imaging is a rapidly maturing field that opens new, important horizons for bioelectromagnetics research. Indeed, unraveling the interaction mechanisms of electromagnetic fields on biological systems (with an emphasis on the brain) requires a monitoring of electrical, functional, and metabolic activity of living tissue at different temporal and spatial scales. Individual tools (e.g., electroencephalography, EEG; functional magnetic resonance imaging, fMRI) are limited in their ability to detect the effects of electromagnetic interaction at specific temporal and spatial scales, so combining these imaging methods offers a unique opportunity to provide a more comprehensive view of effects in living tissue. In this paper, we will present the different imaging techniques that are available to bioelectromagnetics researchers, including their capabilities and how they are complemented by simultaneous hybrid imaging. Future possibilities of hybrid imaging technologies are discussed.

Keywords

Bioelectromagnetics Functional imaging BOLD PET ASL EEG Hybrid imaging 

References

  1. Alavi A, Dann R, Chawluk J, Alavi J, Kushner M, Reivich M (1986) Positron emission tomography imaging of regional cerebral glucose metabolism. Semin Nucl Med 16(1):2–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bluhm RL, Miller J, Lanius RA, Osuch EA, Boksman K, Neufeld RW, Théberge J, Schaefer B, Williamson P (2007) Spontaneous low-frequency fluctuations in the BOLD signal in schizophrenic patients: anomalies in the default network. Schizophr Bull 33(4):1004–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brodmann K (1909/1904). Localisation in the Cerebral Cortex (trans: Garey L) Smith-Gordon, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  4. Cook CM, Saucier DM, Thomas AW, Prato FS (2006) Exposure to ELF magnetic and ELF-modulated radiofrequency fields: the time course of physiological and cognitive effects observed in recent studies (2001–2005). Bioelectromagnetics 27(8):613–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Corbacio M, Brown S, Dubois S, Prato, FS, Thomas AW, Legros A (2011) Human cognitive performance in a 3000 μT power-line frequency magnetic field. Bioelectromagnetics. (BEM-10-0275), in pressGoogle Scholar
  6. Croft RJ, Leung S, McKenzie RJ, Loughran SP, Iskra S, Hamblin DL, Cooper NR (2010) Effects of 2G and 3G mobile phones on human alpha rhythms: resting EEG in adolescents, young adults, and the elderly. Bioelectromagnetics 31:434–444Google Scholar
  7. Detre JA, Wang J (2002) Technical aspects and utility of fMRI using BOLD and ASL. Clin Neurophysiol 113:621–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Penfield W, Jasper H (1954) Epilepsy and the functional anatomy of the human brain. Churchill, UKGoogle Scholar
  9. Reitan RM, Wolfson D (1993) The Halstead-Reitan neuropsychological test battery: theory and clinical interpretation, 2nd edn. Neuropsychology Press, TucsonGoogle Scholar
  10. Robertson JA, Théberge J, Weller J, Drost DJ, Prato FS, Thomas AW (2010) Low frequency pulsed electromagnetic field exposure can alter neuroprocessing in humans. J R Soc Interface 7(44):467–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Shupak NM, Hensel JM, Cross-Mellor SK, Kavaliers M, Prato FS, Thomas AW (2004a) Analgesic and behavioral effects of a 100 microT specific pulsed extremely low frequency magnetic field on control and morphine treated CF-1 mice. Neurosci Lett 354(1):30–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Shupak NM, Prato FS, Thomas AW (2004b) Human exposure to a specific pulsed magnetic field: effects on thermal sensory and pain thresholds. Neurosci Lett 363(2):157–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Shupak NM, McKay JC, Nielson WR, Rollman GB, Prato FS, Thomas AW (2006) Exposure to a specific pulsed low-frequency magnetic field: a double-blind placebo-controlled study of effects on pain ratings in rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia patients. Pain Res Manag 11(2):85–90Google Scholar
  14. Teskey GC, Prato FS, Ossenkopp KP, Kavaliers M (1988) Exposure to time varying magnetic fields associated with magnetic resonance imaging reduces fentanyl-induced analgesia in mice. Bioelectromagnetics 9:167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Thomas AW, Kavaliers M, Prato FS, Ossenkopp KP (1997) Antinociceptive effects of a pulsed magnetic field in the land snail, Cepaea nemoralis. Neurosci Lett 222(2):107–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. van der Meer JN, Tijssen MA, Bour LJ, van Rootselaar AF, Nederveen AJ (2010) Robust EMG-fMRI artifact reduction for motion (FARM). Clin Neurophysiol 121(5):766–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wassermann EM, Pascual-Leone A, Valls-Sole J, Toro C, Cohen LG, Hallett M (1993) Topography of the inhibitory and excitatory responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation in a hand muscle. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 89(6):424–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • John A. Robertson
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alex W. Thomas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Julien Modolo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jodi Miller
    • 1
    • 2
  • Nicole Juen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alexandre Legros
    • 1
    • 2
  • Frank S. Prato
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Bioelectromagnetics Group, Imaging ProgramLawson Health Research InstituteLondonCanada
  2. 2.Departments of Medical Biophysics and Medical ImagingSchulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Western OntarioLondonCanada

Personalised recommendations