PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9931268

Cortical surface-based analysis. I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction.

A M Dale·B Fischl·M I Sereno
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Several properties of the cerebral cortex, including its columnar and laminar organization, as well as the topographic organization of cortical areas, can only be properly understood in the context of the intrinsic two-dimensional structure of the cortical surface. In order to study such cortical properties in humans, it is necessary to obtain an accurate and explicit representation of the cortical surface in individual subjects. Here we describe a set of automated procedures for obtaining accurate reconstructions of the cortical surface, which have been applied to data from more than 100 subjects, requiring little or no manual intervention. Automated routines for unfolding and flattening the cortical surface are described in a companion paper. These procedures allow for the routine use of cortical surface-based analysis and visualization methods in functional brain imaging.

Explore related subjects

Brain MappingCerebral CortexHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingReference ValuesSoftwareJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A M Dale, B Fischl, M I Sereno. 1999. Cortical surface-based analysis. I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction.. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.1998.0395

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2000

Parietal and cingulate processes in central pain. A combined positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study of an unusual case.

Parietal, insular and anterior cingulate cortices are involved in the processing of noxious inputs and genesis of pain sensation. Parietal lesions may generate central pain by mechanisms generally assumed to involve the 'medial' pain system (i.e. medial thalamic nuclei and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC)). We report here PET and fMRI data in a patient who developed central pain and allodynia in her left side after a bifocal infarct involving both the right parietal cortex (SI and SII) and the right ACC (Brodmann areas 24 and 32), thus questioning the schematic representation of cortical pain processing. No rCBF increase was found in any part of the residual cingulate cortices, neither in the basal state (which included spontaneous pain and extended hypoperfusion around the infarct), nor during left allodynic pain. Thus, as previously observed in patients with lateral medullary infarct, neither spontaneous pain nor allodynia reproduce the cingulate activation observed after noxious pain in normal subjects. Conversely, both PET and fMRI data argue in favour of plastic changes in the 'lateral discriminative' pain system. Particularly, allodynia was associated with increased activity anteriorly to the infarct in the right insula/SII cortex. This response is likely to be responsible for the strange and very unpleasant allodynic sensation elicited on the left side by a non-noxious stimulation.

Brain Mapping↗
PubMed1999

Right words and left words: electrophysiological evidence for hemispheric differences in meaning processing.

Both cerebral hemispheres are involved in language processing, each playing a unique role that may derive from differences in knowledge organization and on-line meaning integration. Here, we examine lateralized differences in knowledge representation and retrieval using event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by words in sentences. Volunteers read pairs of sentences ending with three target types: (1) expected words, (2) unexpected words from the expected semantic category, and (3) unexpected words from an unexpected category. Context was presented word by word at fixation while targets were presented two degrees to the right or left of fixation. ERPs to unexpected endings were more negative than those to expected endings in both visual fields. However, when presented to the right visual field (left hemisphere), unexpected items from the expected category elicited smaller N400s than those from an unexpected category. In contrast, when presented to the left visual field (right hemisphere) all unexpected endings elicited N400s of similar amplitude. Thus, while both hemispheres are sensitive to context, only the left hemisphere is sensitive to semantic similarity between an unexpected ending and the expected completion. The results suggest lateralized differences in how new information is integrated into sentences. We propose that right hemisphere processing is best characterized as 'integrative'; new information is compared directly with context information. In contrast, left hemisphere processing is better characterized as 'predictive'; the processing of context leads to an expectation about the semantic features of upcoming items and new information is compared with that expectation rather than directly with the context.

Brain Mapping↗