Abstract
Physiological signals such as pulse and respiration strongly contribute to non-neuronal signal change of the blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) contrast in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). This has been observed not only during task-based but also during resting-state fMRI measurements, where the confounding influence of physiological signals is most pronounced. Over the last decades, a variety of techniques evolved, aiming at detecting and removing physiological artifacts in fMRI time series. These follow either a solely data-driven approach or rely on externally recorded physiological data. To record cardiac and respiratory signals, typically pulse oximetry or electrocardiography (ECG) and a respiration belt are used, respectively. New technologies allow to capture respiratory signal directly with a sensor placed within the spine coil in the patient table, eliminating the need of a respiration belt, which considerably increases participants’ comfort. However, little is known about the effectiveness of these new technologies and how they compare to the standard respiration belt recording. In the current study, we compared the two devices, respiration belt and spine coil sensor, in their suitability for physiological noise removal during a visual perception task and during rest. We did not find any differences in resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) or stimulus-related activity between data corrected with the two recording devices. However, we did find reduced residual noise in the time series corrected with spine coil-derived respiration signals compared to belt-based corrected data in the task dataset. Our results show that spine coil-derived respiration recordings are slightly superior to belt respiration recordings for physiological noise removal in task-induced activity, with spine coil recordings having an additional advantage in terms of subject comfort.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the BioTechMed-Graz Young Research Group Grant to N.Z.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The local ethics committee of the University of Graz approved this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced are available online at https://osf.io/hr7v4/
