Elsevier

NeuroImage

Volume 34, Issue 3, 1 February 2007, Pages 1060-1073
NeuroImage

Dodecapus: An MR-compatible system for somatosensory stimulation

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.10.024Get rights and content

Abstract

Somatotopic mapping of human body surface using fMRI is challenging. First, it is difficult to deliver tactile stimuli in the scanner. Second, multiple stimulators are often required to cover enough area of the complex-shaped body surface, such as the face. In this study, a computer-controlled pneumatic system was constructed to automatically deliver air puffs to 12 locations on the body surface through an MR-compatible manifold (Dodecapus) mounted on a head coil inside the scanner bore. The timing of each air-puff channel is completely programmable and this allows systematic and precise stimulation on multiple locations on the body surface during functional scans. Three two-condition block-design “Localizer” paradigms were employed to localize the cortical representations of the face, lips, and fingers, respectively. Three “Phase-encoded” paradigms were employed to map the detailed somatotopic organizations of the face, lips, and fingers following each “Localizer” paradigm. Multiple somatotopic representations of the face, lips, and fingers were localized and mapped in primary motor cortex (MI), ventral premotor cortex (PMv), polysensory zone (PZ), primary (SI) and secondary (SII) somatosensory cortex, parietal ventral area (PV) and 7b, as well as anterior and ventral intraparietal areas (AIP and VIP). The Dodecapus system is portable, easy to setup, generates no radio frequency interference, and can also be used for EEG and MEG experiments. This system could be useful for non-invasive somatotopic mapping in both basic and clinical studies.

Introduction

Topographic mapping is a fundamental organizing principle of sensory systems in the brain. In primary visual cortex (V1), adjacent locations receive inputs from adjacent photoreceptors on the retina, which is known as retinotopy. Similarly, different frequencies of sounds are represented in a tonotopic map in auditory cortex. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has been used to non-invasively reveal topographic maps in visual, auditory, somatosensory, and parietal cortices (Overduin and Servos, 2004, Sereno et al., 1995, Sereno et al., 2001, Sereno and Tootell, 2005, Servos et al., 1998, Servos et al., 1999, Talavage et al., 2004). Somatotopic mapping is more difficult than retinotopy and tonotopy, however. One major limitation for an fMRI experiment is that the physical stimulus device must be compatible with the scanner environment. Visual stimuli can be projected onto a plastic screen inside the scanner bore, and auditory stimuli can be delivered through MR-compatible headphones. In somatosensory experiments, physical touch or vibration on the body surface is required to elicit sensorimotor activations, and multiple stimulators are usually needed in order to stimulate different body parts. Active finger tapping and self-paced movements are commonly used for localizing sensorimotor sites in clinical scans. The timing, intensity, and coverage of manual stimulations generated by the subject or delivered by experimenters are not as consistent and precise as those driven by mechanical devices. However, most vibrotactile devices contain metals or electrical circuits and may not be compatible with the MR environment.

Several MR-compatible devices for somatosensory stimulation have been proposed. Flexible shafts made of carbon fiber have been successfully used to deliver vibrotactile stimuli mechanically in the scanner (Golaszewski et al., 2002a). That device does not use any metallic component inside the scanner, and produces precise vibrating frequencies and amplitudes. Magnetomechanical vibrotactile devices (MVDs) are made of MR-compatible coils, but are sensitive to placement and orientation inside the scanner (Graham et al., 2001). A piezoceramic vibrotactile stimulator generates 1–300 Hz vibrations, but requires high voltage to produce relatively small displacements (Harrington et al., 2000, Harrington and Downs, 2001, Francis et al., 2000, Gizewski et al., 2005, McGlone et al., 2002). Both magnetomechanical and piezoceramic vibrotactile devices lead electrical wires into the scanner, which may interfere with MR signal acquisition; furthermore, they may be heated by RF pulses if not shielded properly. Similar concerns may exist for experiments that apply electrical stimulation on the skin (Blankenburg et al., 2003, McGlone et al., 2002). Pneumatically driven vibrators and air-puff devices are devoid of electromagnetic interference because they use plastic tubes and MR-compatible materials inside the scanner (Briggs et al., 2004, Golaszewski et al., 2002b, Overduin and Servos, 2004, Servos et al., 1998, Servos et al., 1999, Stippich et al., 1999, Stippich et al., 2004, Zappe et al., 2004). Pneumatically driven devices usually generate tactile stimulation at lower frequencies (< 150 Hz), which are sufficient for eliciting somatosensory responses. Each of the aforementioned approaches for somatosensory stimulation has advantages and limitations. The selection of devices depends on their applications in various scientific and clinical contexts.

Accurate and detailed somatotopic mapping of the human body surface will improve basic understanding of the somatosensory system, guide neurosurgical planning, and assess plasticity and recovery after brain damage or body injuries (Borsook et al., 1998, Corbetta et al., 2002, Cramer et al., 2000, Cramer et al., 2003, Cramer and Bastings, 2000, Cramer and Crafton, 2006, Lee et al., 1998, Lee et al., 1999, Moore et al., 2000b, Ramachandran, 2005, Ramachandran and Rogers-Ramachandran, 2000, Rijntjes et al., 1997). Studies using fMRI have revealed somatotopic representations of the hand, fingers, wrist, elbow, shoulder, foot, toes, lips, and tongue in human brains (Alkadhi et al., 2002, Beisteiner et al., 2001, Blankenburg et al., 2003, Dechent and Frahm, 2003, Francis et al., 2000, Gelnar et al., 1998, Golaszewski et al., 2006, Hanakawa et al., 2005, Hlustik et al., 2001, Kurth et al., 2000, Lotze et al., 2000, McGlone et al., 2002, Miyamoto et al., 2006, Moore et al., 2000a, Overduin and Servos, 2004, Ruben et al., 2001, Servos et al., 1998, Stippich et al., 1999, Stippich et al., 2004, van Westen et al., 2004; also see reviews in Burton, 2002). The human face contains important sensory organs and is essential for verbal and nonverbal communications in daily life. However, only a few studies investigated somatotopy of the human face (including the lips and ears) using fMRI (Corbetta et al., 2002, DaSilva et al., 2002, Disbrow et al., 2000, Hodge et al., 1998, Iannetti et al., 2003, Miyamoto et al., 2006, Nihashi et al., 2002, Servos et al., 1999, Stippich et al., 1999) and other non-invasive and invasive techniques (Nakamura et al., 1998, Nevalainen et al., 2006, Nguyen et al., 2004, Nguyen et al., 2005, Sato et al., 2002, Sato et al., 2005, Schwartz et al., 2004, Yang et al., 1993). In most studies, only two or three locations on the face were stimulated manually or automatically. Somatotopic mapping of the whole face using fMRI is challenging because of the difficulty in delivering tactile stimuli to the face surrounded by a head coil. Most of the aforementioned MR-compatible devices have been used mainly for stimulation on the fingers. For instance, MVDs (Graham et al., 2001) were not tested for face stimulation inside the head coil. In addition, multiple stimulators are required to cover the whole face during the same scanning session. The arrangement and fixation of multiple stimulators with respect to the face inside the head coil remain a challenging task.

In this study, a computer-controlled MR-compatible pneumatic system (Dodecapus) was constructed and used to automatically and systematically deliver somatosensory stimuli around the whole face inside the head coil. Block-design and phase-encoded paradigms were used to map the locations and internal organization of face representation in motor, parietal, and primary and secondary somatosensory cortices. The phase-encoded technique has been successfully employed in retinotopic, tonotopic, spatiotopic, and somatotopic mapping experiments (Engel et al., 1994, Overduin and Servos, 2004, Sereno et al., 1995, Sereno et al., 2001, Servos et al., 1998, Servos et al., 1999, Talavage et al., 2004). In a different session, the same system and paradigms as in the face somatotopy experiment were used to map the lip and finger representations.

Section snippets

Participants

Six healthy right-handed subjects (2 males, 4 females; aged 20–30) participated in this study. All subjects participated in one fMRI session for face mapping, and four of them participated in one additional session for lip and finger mapping. Subjects gave informed consent, according to protocols approved by the Human Research Protections Program of the University of California, San Diego.

System design and setup

The Dodecapus system is composed of the following components (Fig. 1): a portable stimulus computer (XPC,

Results

Results of functional scans were rendered on inflated cortical surfaces using FreeSurfer (Dale et al., 1999, Fischl et al., 1999, Sereno et al., 1995, Sereno et al., 2001). Fig. 3, Fig. 4 illustrate somatotopic representations of the face, lips, and fingers of the same subject (JG). Fig. 4C shows a summary of somatotopic areas in this subject with outlines derived from the phase-encoded mapping scans (Fig. 3, Fig. 4). Table 1 summarizes the Talairach coordinates of multiple somatotopic areas

Discussion

Functional magnetic resonance imaging has become a routine tool in cognitive neuroscience but is currently less used for clinical studies. Experimental setup in the MR environment remains a challenging task, especially for somatosensory experiments. In this study, a computer-controlled, MR-compatible system was constructed and demonstrated that can deliver air puff tactile stimuli automatically inside or near the RF head coil in the scanner bore.

Fully automatic tactile stimulation could

Conclusions

Dodecapus, a computer-controlled MR-compatible system was constructed to automatically and independently deliver light air puffs to 12 locations on the body surface through a manifold inside the magnet. While we focused primarily on face stimulation, this flexible system can also deliver air puffs to lips, fingers and other body parts during the same scan. Two-condition block design paradigms were employed to localize the representations of the face, lips and fingers in the primary and

Acknowledgments

We thank Rick Buxton, Eric Wong, Tom Liu, and Larry Frank at the UCSD fMRI Center for scan time, pulse sequences, and advice, Larry May for hardware support, Ronald Kurz for machine shop help, and Laura Kemmer for pilot experiments and comments. Supported by NSF BCS 0224321 (Sereno), NIH R01 NS41925 (E. Wong), NIH R01 NS36722 (R. Buxton), NIH R01 HD041581 (J. Stiles), and The Swartz Foundation (S. Makeig and T.-P. Jung).

References (89)

  • E.R. Gizewski et al.

    Cerebral activation using a MR-compatible piezoelectric actuator with adjustable vibration frequencies and in vivo wave propagation control

    NeuroImage

    (2005)
  • S.M. Golaszewski et al.

    Functional magnetic resonance imaging of the human sensorimotor cortex using a novel vibrotactile stimulator

    NeuroImage

    (2002)
  • S.M. Golaszewski et al.

    A new pneumatic vibrator for functional magnetic resonance imaging of the human sensorimotor cortex

    Neurosci. Lett.

    (2002)
  • S.M. Golaszewski et al.

    Human brain structures related to plantar vibrotactile stimulation: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study

    NeuroImage

    (2006)
  • G.S. Harrington et al.

    FMRI mapping of the somatosensory cortex with vibratory stimuli. Is there a dependency on stimulus frequency?

    Brain Res.

    (2001)
  • G.D. Iannetti et al.

    Representation of different trigeminal divisions within the primary and secondary human somatosensory cortex

    NeuroImage

    (2003)
  • M. Lotze et al.

    fMRI evaluation of somatotopic representation in human primary motor cortex

    NeuroImage

    (2000)
  • F. McGlone et al.

    Functional neuroimaging studies of human somatosensory cortex

    Behav. Brain Res.

    (2002)
  • A. Nakamura et al.

    Somatosensory homunculus as drawn by MEG

    NeuroImage

    (1998)
  • P. Nevalainen et al.

    Trigeminal somatosensory evoked magnetic fields to tactile stimulation

    Clin. Neurophysiol.

    (2006)
  • B.T. Nguyen et al.

    Face representation in the human primary somatosensory cortex

    Neurosci. Res.

    (2004)
  • B.T. Nguyen et al.

    Face representation in the human secondary somatosensory cortex

    Clin. Neurophysiol.

    (2005)
  • T. Nihashi et al.

    Functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence for a representation of the ear in human primary somatosensory cortex: comparison with magnetoencephalography study

    NeuroImage

    (2002)
  • S.A. Overduin et al.

    Distributed digit somatotopy in primary somatosensory cortex

    NeuroImage

    (2004)
  • K. Sato et al.

    Functional representation of the finger and face in the human somatosensory cortex: intraoperative intrinsic optical imaging

    NeuroImage

    (2005)
  • M.I. Sereno et al.

    From monkeys to humans: what do we now know about brain homologies?

    Curr. Opin. Neurobiol.

    (2005)
  • C. Stippich et al.

    Somatotopic mapping of the human primary somatosensory cortex by fully automated tactile stimulation using functional magnetic resonance imaging

    Neurosci. Lett.

    (1999)
  • C. Stippich et al.

    Fully automated localization of the human primary somatosensory cortex in one minute by functional magnetic resonance imaging

    Neurosci. Lett.

    (2004)
  • H. Alkadhi et al.

    Somatotopy in the ipsilateral primary motor cortex

    NeuroReport

    (2002)
  • F. Binkofski et al.

    Human anterior intraparietal area subserves prehension: a combined lesion and functional MRI activation study

    Neurology

    (1998)
  • R. Blake et al.

    Neural synergy between kinetic vision and touch

    Psychol. Sci.

    (2004)
  • F. Blankenburg et al.

    Evidence for a rostral-to-caudal somatotopic organization in human primary somatosensory cortex with mirror-reversal in areas 3b and 1

    Cereb. Cortex

    (2003)
  • D. Borsook et al.

    Acute plasticity in the human somatosensory cortex following amputation

    NeuroReport

    (1998)
  • D. Borsook et al.

    Functional imaging of the human trigeminal system: opportunities for new insights into pain processing in health and disease

    J. Neurobiol.

    (2004)
  • R.W. Briggs et al.

    A pneumatic vibrotactile stimulation device for fMRI

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2004)
  • H. Burton

    Cerebral cortical regions devoted to the somatosensory system: results from brain imaging studies in humans

  • J.-O. Coq et al.

    Anatomical and functional organization of somatosensory areas of the lateral fissure of the New World titi monkey (Callicebus moloch)

    J. Comp. Neurol.

    (2004)
  • M. Corbetta et al.

    Functional reorganization and stability of somatosensory-motor cortical topography in a tetraplegic subject with late recovery

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.

    (2002)
  • S.C. Cramer et al.

    Somatotopy and movement representation sites following cortical stroke

    Exp. Brain Res.

    (2006)
  • S.C. Cramer et al.

    A pilot study of somatotopic mapping after cortical infarct

    Stroke

    (2000)
  • S.C. Cramer et al.

    Mapping individual brains to guide restorative therapy after stroke: rationale and pilot studies

    Neurol. Res.

    (2003)
  • J.C. Culham

    Human brain imaging reveals a parietal area specialized for grasping

  • A.F. DaSilva et al.

    Somatotopic activation in the human trigeminal pain pathway

    J. Neurosci.

    (2002)
  • P. Dechent et al.

    Functional somatotopy of finger representations in human primary motor cortex

    Hum. Brain Mapp.

    (2003)
  • Cited by (70)

    • Evolutionary perspective on peripersonal space and perception

      2023, Cognitive Archaeology, Body Cognition, and the Evolution of Visuospatial Perception
    • A new patterned air-flow device to reveal the network for tactile motion coding using fMRI

      2022, Journal of Neuroscience Methods
      Citation Excerpt :

      Another type of somatosensory set-up which has recently been developed and used in multiple studies investigating somatosensory processing, especially somatotopy, uses pneumatics devices (Hao et al., 2013; Huang and Sereno, 2007; Zappe et al., 2004). Huang and Sereno (2007) have for instance developed a system, called the Dodecapus, that can be mounted on the head coil and that can deliver point somatosensory stimulations across the participant’s face, which allowed a precise description of the somatosensory face map in the parietal cortex. However, the ability to perceive complex dynamic airflow stimulation and its neural basis have received less attention so far, while in the visual domain, optic flows have been extensively used to study self-motion processing (Arnoldussen et al., 2011; Indovina et al., 2013; Kleinschmidt et al., 2002; Kovacs et al., 2008).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text