# Pseudo current density maps of electrophysiological heart, nerve or brain function and their physical basis

- Wolfgang Haberkorn
^{1}, - Uwe Steinhoff
^{1}, - Martin Burghoff
^{1}, - Olaf Kosch
^{1}, - Andreas Morguet
^{2}and - Hans Koch
^{1}Email author

**4**:5

**DOI: **10.1186/1477-044X-4-5

© Haberkorn et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006

**Received: **04 August 2006

**Accepted: **13 October 2006

**Published: **13 October 2006

## Abstract

### Background

In recent years the visualization of biomagnetic measurement data by so-called pseudo current density maps or Hosaka-Cohen (HC) transformations became popular.

### Methods

The physical basis of these intuitive maps is clarified by means of analytically solvable problems.

### Results

Examples in magnetocardiography, magnetoencephalography and magnetoneurography demonstrate the usefulness of this method.

### Conclusion

Hardware realizations of the HC-transformation and some similar transformations are discussed which could advantageously support cross-platform comparability of biomagnetic measurements.

## Background

In 1976 Cohen et al. introduced in a sequence of publications a method to construct so-called pseudo current density- or arrow-maps from multichannel biomagnetic signals obtained by magnetocardiography (MCG) [1–4]. The purpose was to transform the measured magnetic field values in a way that the resulting maps could be more easily related to the underlying current density distribution. Later this method was frequently referred to as the Hosaka-Cohen (HC) transformation and its performance was analyzed in some detail [5, 6]. However, it did not find widespread application until recent years, when a kind of renaissance of this method occurred. Recently, the HC-transformation is used in MCG [7–21], fetal MCG [22–24], magnetoencephalography (MEG) [25–27] and magnetoneurography (MNG) [28].

A reason for this new development may be the advance of computing power and visualization tools. In addition, in former times system designers preferred to display magnetic field maps (MFM), since they were interested in the measured physical quantity. However, for the end-user -the physicians- MFMs are not very instructive, as the MFM maximum values do not occur above those positions where the generating currents are flowing.

- i)
while Hosaka and Cohen coded the information of the pseudo current density amplitude into the size of the arrows the recent display techniques added an underlying false-colour scaling to the maps.

ii) visually attractive results are achieved, if a sequence of maps is presented as an animated clip. Then the spatio-temporal dynamics of the electrophysiological function are more easily perceptible.

The question that remains open is: what do pseudo current density maps really show? Already the term "pseudo" indicates that the real current density distribution is different and may deviate considerably. This is already evident when considering the fact that the PCD-maps are only 2D-projections of a 3D reality. The initial papers of Hosaka and Cohen just gave an empirical explanation, why their maps produce an approximate image of the underlying current density distribution. Later explanations e.g. by other authors [7] relating the curl of the measured magnetic induction curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ with the current density $\overrightarrow{j}$ were incorrect and misleading. Therefore in the following chapters an analytically based calculation is presented that illustrates the physical justification and the limitations of this visualization method.

This paper will not deal with minimum norm estimates or other inverse methods calculating the current density from field maps. Rather, the Hosaka-Cohen transformation provides just another representation of the measured magnetic field by a postprocessing of the magnetic field data. The underlying current distribution does not enter in the calculation of the HC-transformation. We intend to clarify in which way certain features of the PCD-maps can nevertheless be related to the underlying current distribution. Some common fallacies in the interpretation of PCD maps are elucidated.

Finally we would like to stress the utility of PCD maps to provide a visualization of measurement results obtained by biomagnetic systems with very different sensor configurations. Whether magnetometers, planar gradiometers or vector magnetometers are used always similar PCD maps may be computed and will thus allow a simple cross-platform, i.e. multicentre comparability of biomagnetic investigations.

## Methods

### Construction of pseudo current density maps

PCD-maps are obtained from magnetic field values at a number of points in space [29, 30]. Multichannel measurement systems, containing a number of SQUIDs (superconducting quantum interference devices) as magnetic field sensors, are used to measure the magnetic fields generated by electrophysiological functions in the heart (MCG = magnetocardiography), the brain (MEG = magnetoencephalography) or in other muscles or nerves (MNG = magnetoneurography). In MEG, helmet systems are used, where the SQUIDs are arranged on the surface of a sphere. For other applications, the SQUIDs are distributed more or less in a plane.

For the following discussion a *simple* current dipole source with current dipole moment

$\overrightarrow{p}=I\overrightarrow{s}\left(1\right)$

may be considered, i.e. a source-drain configuration with vanishing source-drain distance with unit vector $\overrightarrow{s}$ and a source strength of *I*. This current element generates a magnetic flux density $\overrightarrow{B}$($\overrightarrow{r}$) which – according to the law of Biot-Savart – is expressed as

$\overrightarrow{B}(\overrightarrow{r})=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}\frac{\overrightarrow{p}\times \overrightarrow{r}}{{r}^{3}}.\left(2\right)$

*B*

_{ z }. Fig. 4 shows the

*B*

_{ z }-distribution calculated with (2) for a measurement plane of size 40 cm × 40 cm which is positioned 10 cm above a current dipole with a dipole moment of 1 μAm. The direction of the dipole within the

*x*-

*y*-plane is diagonal to the coordinate system and the magnetic flux density distribution is presented as an isocontour plot. The difference between two adjacent contour lines corresponds to a magnetic flux density difference of 0.5 pT. Red lines correspond to positive

*B*

_{ z }-values and blue lines to negative

*B*

_{ z }-values and the black line marks

*B*

_{ z }= 0. The pseudo current density $\overrightarrow{c}$(

*x*,

*y*) in the map in Fig. 5 is gained from the

*B*

_{ z }-values by the following transformation

$\overrightarrow{c}=\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial y}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}-\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial x}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}.\left(3\right)$

Thus the slopes of the *B*_{
z
}-surface function determine the amplitude and the direction of the pseudo current arrows $\overrightarrow{c}$(*x*, *y*). $\overrightarrow{e}$_{
x
}and $\overrightarrow{e}$_{
y
}are the unit vectors in *x*- and *y*-direction.

In practice the partial differential ratios $\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial x}$ and $\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial y}$ are approximated by the difference ratios $\frac{\Delta {B}_{z}}{\Delta x}$ and $\frac{\Delta {B}_{z}}{\Delta y}$. They in turn may be easily obtained by utilizing the smooth surface function ${{{B}_{z}\left({x}_{i},{y}_{j}\right)|}_{i=0,\mathrm{...},n}|}_{j=0,\mathrm{...},m}$ that has been used to construct the map in Fig. 4.

The arrows drawn in Fig. 5 represent the $\overrightarrow{c}$-vectors at the respective coordinates. However, only the strongest $\overrightarrow{c}$-vectors are drawn to obtain a clearer picture. Although the amplitude of $\overrightarrow{c}$ is coded as the arrow length, a map with just those arrows is not as intuitive as the image shown. By underlying a false-color map scaled by the amplitude |$\overrightarrow{c}$| a considerable visual enhancement of the information is achieved.

As to be anticipated the maximum amplitude occurs just above the source and also the directions of the central strongest arrow$\overrightarrow{c}$ and that of the current dipole $\overrightarrow{p}$ coincide. On the other hand the PCD-map does not reproduce the point-like character of the current dipole! It is rather a characteristic point-spread function of the source.

Another interesting point to mention: the Hosaka-Cohen transformation utilizes two terms of

$\text{curl}\overrightarrow{B}=\left(\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial y}-\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial z}\right){\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}+\left(\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial z}-\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial x}\right){\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}+\left(\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial y}\right){\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}.\left(4\right)$

As – according to Maxwell – curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ = μ_{0}$\overrightarrow{j}$ some authors concluded that this is the rationale for the pseudo-current density maps. However, at the sites where $\overrightarrow{B}$ is measured the current density is zero and thus also curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ = 0 holds. Hence no direct relation between $\overrightarrow{j}$ and $\overrightarrow{c}$ and curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ exists at the location of the sensors. But since curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ = 0 everywhere in the measurement space, the two terms that represents $\overrightarrow{c}$ must exactly compensate the remaining terms of curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ (from equation 4). This in turn leads to the conclusion that also the remaining terms lead to equivalent arrow maps, as it is discussed later in this paper.

## Results

### Pseudo current density maps of analytically solvable models

- i)
modeling the MCG by a current dipole in a conductive half space, and

ii) modeling the MNG by an extended linear or curved source [28, 31] or by a train of current dipoles in a conducting half space and

iii) modeling the MEG by a current dipole in a conductive sphere.

Of course also those are quite crude models of the reality but they represent basic models of sound physics and can be treated completely analytical. Thus the relations between source and PCD-map and the role of curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ are exactly traceable.

#### Current dipole in a conductive half space

To a first approximation the MCG may be modeled by a current dipole $\overrightarrow{p}$ = (*p*_{
x
}, *p*_{
y
}, *p*_{
z
}) at $\overrightarrow{r}$_{0} = (*x*_{0}, *y*_{0}, *z*_{0}), representing the heart's electrical activity, in a conductive half space, representing the torso. The coordinate system is chosen such that z = 0 at the boundary between the "torso" with constant conductivity and the non-conducting space containing the measurement sites.

The magnetic flux density at coordinate $\overrightarrow{r}$ = (*x*, *y*, *z*) above the half space (z > 0) is according to [32] given by

$\overrightarrow{B}(\overrightarrow{r})=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi {K}^{2}}\left\{\left[\left(\overrightarrow{p}\times \overrightarrow{R}\right){\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}\right]\nabla K-K{\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}\times \overrightarrow{p}\right\}\left(5\right)$

with $\overrightarrow{R}$ = $\overrightarrow{r}$ - $\overrightarrow{r}$_{0}, *R* = |$\overrightarrow{R}$|, *K* = *R* (*R* + $\overrightarrow{R}$$\overrightarrow{e}$_{
z
}), and $\nabla K=(2+\frac{\overrightarrow{R}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}}{R})\overrightarrow{R}+R{\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}$, where ∇ is the nabla operator. In Cartesian coordinates $\overrightarrow{B}$ can be explicitly written as

$\begin{array}{c}{B}_{x}\left(\overrightarrow{r}\right)=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}{p}_{x}\frac{XY}{{X}^{2}+{Y}^{2}}\left[\frac{2}{{X}^{2}+{Y}^{2}}\left(1-\frac{Z}{R}\right)-\frac{Z}{{R}^{3}}\right]\\ +\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}{p}_{y}\frac{1}{{X}^{2}+{Y}^{2}}\left[\frac{{Y}^{2}-{X}^{2}}{{X}^{2}+{Y}^{2}}\left(1-\frac{Z}{R}\right)+\frac{{X}^{2}Z}{{R}^{3}}\right],\end{array}\left(6\right)$

$\begin{array}{c}{B}_{y}\left(\overrightarrow{r}\right)=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}{p}_{x}\frac{1}{{X}^{2}+{Y}^{2}}\left[\frac{{Y}^{2}-{X}^{2}}{{X}^{2}+{Y}^{2}}\left(1-\frac{Z}{R}\right)-\frac{{Y}^{2}Z}{{R}^{3}}\right]\\ -\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}{p}_{y}\frac{XY}{{X}^{2}+{Y}^{2}}\left[\frac{2}{{X}^{2}+{Y}^{2}}\left(1-\frac{Z}{R}\right)-\frac{Z}{{R}^{3}}\right],\end{array}\left(7\right)$

${B}_{z}\left(\overrightarrow{r}\right)=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}\frac{Y{p}_{x}-X{p}_{y}}{{R}^{3}}\left(8\right)$

with *X* = (*x* - *x*_{0}), *Y* = (*y* - *y*_{0}) and *Z* = (*z* - *z*_{0}).

An inspection of (6)–(8) shows that

• *p*_{
z
}does not contribute to $\overrightarrow{B}$($\overrightarrow{r}$) above z > 0,

• *B*_{
x
}($\overrightarrow{r}$), *B*_{
y
}($\overrightarrow{r}$), and *B*_{
z
}($\overrightarrow{r}$) do not depend on the position of the torso boundary as long as it is between measurement point and current dipole,

• the difference to the $\overrightarrow{B}$ – field calculated by Biot-Savart's law for an isolated current dipole occurs only in (6) and (7),

Note that the above field properties are also valid for a horizontally layered conductor, i.e. for a conductivity σ = σ (*z*).

Now the Hosaka-Cohen transformation (3) is applied to (8) and yields

$\overrightarrow{c}=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}\left[\frac{{p}_{x}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}+{p}_{y}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}}{{R}^{3}}-\frac{3\left\{\left[{p}_{x}{Y}^{2}-{p}_{y}XY\right]{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}+\left[{p}_{y}{X}^{2}-{p}_{x}XY\right]{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}\right\}}{{R}^{5}}\right].\left(9\right)$

Particularly for *X* = 0, *Y* = 0, i.e. directly above the current dipole, one obtains

$\overrightarrow{c}=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}\frac{{p}_{x}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}+{p}_{y}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}}{{Z}^{3}}.\left(10\right)$

In this case $\overrightarrow{c}$ is directly proportional to the *x*-*y*-projection of the current dipole moment $\overrightarrow{p}$.

This supports the argument that the Hosaka-Cohen transformation is really related to the underlying current source. However, it is also evident from (9) that additional terms are blurring and distorting the image.

On first sight the distribution of arrows might suggest that this is an image not only of the current dipole but also of the return currents (also termed: volume currents). And indeed, the model "dipole current in a conductive half space" considers the role of the return currents. However, in this special geometry, the volume currents do not contribute to *B*_{
z
}($\overrightarrow{r}$)as can be seen above. It becomes also evident, that the spatial distribution of $\overrightarrow{c}$ away from *X* = 0, *Y* = 0 does not represent the return currents if *Z* is varied. Without loss in validity of equations (6)–(8) one may consider that $\overrightarrow{p}$ is very close to the half space interface *z* = 0 and the measurement of *B*_{
z
}(*x*, *y*) is performed at different distances approaching $\overrightarrow{p}$. In this theoretical case, the image approximates in the limit (*z* - *z*_{0}) = 0 a point-like distribution with vanishing $\overrightarrow{c}$(*x*, *y*) apart from the origin *X* = 0, *Y* = 0. However, the volume currents keep their amplitude independently from *z* as only the measurement device is moved and not the current dipole source. Thus the nature of the $\overrightarrow{c}$ – image is a point spread function of non-radial symmetry.

A closer look to just one component (e.g. the *x*-component) of $\overrightarrow{c}$ reveals that it is composed of two terms

${c}_{x}=\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial y}=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}\left[\frac{{p}_{x}}{{R}^{3}}-\frac{3Y\left[Y{p}_{x}-X{p}_{y}\right]}{{R}^{5}}\right].\text{(11)}$

*c*

_{ x }is not directly proportional to

*p*

_{ x }as the second term contains mixed terms. However, it contributes a kind of focussing effect.

#### Current dipole in a conductive sphere

For a current dipole $\overrightarrow{p}$ at $\overrightarrow{r}$_{0} in a conductive sphere similar relations can be obtained in terms of spherical coordinates *r*, ϑ, φ. The magnetic flux density outside the sphere is given by [32]

$\overrightarrow{B}(\overrightarrow{r})=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi {F}^{2}}\left\{F(\overrightarrow{p}\times {\overrightarrow{r}}_{0})-\left[(\overrightarrow{p}\times {\overrightarrow{r}}_{0})\cdot \overrightarrow{r}\right]\nabla F\right\}\left(12\right)$

with *F* = *R*(*r R* + $\overrightarrow{r}$$\overrightarrow{R}$), $\overrightarrow{R}$ = $\overrightarrow{r}$ - $\overrightarrow{r}$_{0}, *R* = |$\overrightarrow{R}$|, *r* = |$\overrightarrow{r}$|, and

∇*F* = [*r*^{-1} *R*^{2} + *R*^{-1} ($\overrightarrow{r}$$\overrightarrow{R}$) + 2*R* +2*r*]$\overrightarrow{r}$ - [*R* + 2*r* + *R*^{-1} ($\overrightarrow{r}$$\overrightarrow{R}$)]$\overrightarrow{r}$_{0}.

This expression is valid for a conductivity profile σ = σ (*r*).

For the case of the dipole being positioned on the *z*-axis at $\overrightarrow{r}$_{0} = (0, 0, *z*_{0}) the radial component of $\overrightarrow{B}$($\overrightarrow{r}$) becomes

${B}_{r}=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}\frac{{z}_{0}\mathrm{sin}\vartheta ({p}_{x}\mathrm{sin}\varphi -{p}_{y}\mathrm{cos}\varphi )}{{R}^{3}}\left(13\right)$

with *R* = (*r*^{2} - 2 *z*_{0} *r* cosϑ + ${z}_{0}^{2}$)^{1/2}.

Then for the pseudo current density the following relation

$\overrightarrow{c}=\frac{1}{r\mathrm{sin}\vartheta}\frac{\partial {B}_{r}}{\partial \varphi}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{\vartheta}-\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial {B}_{r}}{\partial \vartheta}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{\varphi}\left(14\right)$

gained from curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ in spherical coordinates may be applied to (13) leading to

$\overrightarrow{c}=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}\frac{{z}_{0}}{r{R}^{3}}\left[\left({p}_{x}\mathrm{cos}\varphi +{p}_{y}\mathrm{sin}\varphi \right){\overrightarrow{e}}_{\vartheta}-\left({p}_{x}\mathrm{sin}\varphi -{p}_{y}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)\left(\mathrm{cos}\vartheta -\frac{3{z}_{0}r{\mathrm{sin}}^{2}\vartheta}{{R}^{2}}\right){\overrightarrow{e}}_{\varphi}\right]\left(15\right)$

Particularly for ϑ = 0, i. e. directly above the current dipole, one obtains

$\overrightarrow{c}=\frac{{\mu}_{0}}{4\pi}\frac{{z}_{0}}{z{(z-{z}_{0})}^{3}}\left({p}_{x}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}+{p}_{y}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}\right).\left(16\right)$

Thus the discussion of the results follows the same lines as in the preceding chapter.

### Pseudo current density maps for MNG and MEG recordings

*B*

_{ z }-field component 15 ms after the stimulus and in Fig. 7, bottom, the corresponding PCD-map are shown. Inspecting the isocontour map from Fig. 7 only a raw understanding of an underlying current and its direction corresponding to the zero line of the map is possible for an expert. The PCD-map allows a more intuitive conclusion that the underlying nerve current is extremely extended and slightly curved.

## Discussion

### Alternative pseudo current density maps and corresponding hardware realizations

*x*- and

*y*-gradiometers, provides -if wired accordingly- just the approximation of $\overrightarrow{c}$(

*x*,

*y*) (cf. Fig. 9). Consequently, the software of the first SQUID-systems of that design contained a program called "arrow mapper".

As mentioned before an interrelation between $\overrightarrow{c}$ and curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ exists. Equation (4) may be rewritten as

$\text{curl}\overrightarrow{B}=\left(\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}-\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial y}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}\right)+\left(\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial x}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}-\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}\right)+\left(\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial y}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}-\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial x}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}\right).\left(17\right)$

For this case curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ can be written as a sum of three vectors $\overrightarrow{a}$, $\overrightarrow{b}$, and $\overrightarrow{c}$ where $\overrightarrow{c}$ is identical to (3), i.e.

curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ = $\overrightarrow{a}$ + $\overrightarrow{b}$ + $\overrightarrow{c}$ (18)

Outside the body $\overrightarrow{a}$ + $\overrightarrow{b}$ + $\overrightarrow{c}$ = 0 due to curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ = 0. Therefore $\overrightarrow{a}$ + $\overrightarrow{b}$ just cancel $\overrightarrow{c}$ and – ($\overrightarrow{a}$ + $\overrightarrow{b}$) will provide the same pseudo current density map as well!

In addition, if curl $\overrightarrow{B}$ = 0 then

$\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial y}=\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial z};\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial z}=\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial x};\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial x}=\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial y}\left(19\right)$

and only 2 components *B*_{
x
}, *B*_{
y
}, or *B*_{
x
}, *B*_{
z
}, or *B*_{
y
}, *B*_{
z
}are necessary to construct $\overrightarrow{a}$, $\overrightarrow{b}$, and $\overrightarrow{c}$.

For example, by exploiting relations (19) the three vectors constructed with *B*_{
x
}, *B*_{
y
}yield

$\overrightarrow{a}=\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}-\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial y}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}=\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}-\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial x}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{z},\left(20\right)$

$\overrightarrow{b}=\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial x}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}-\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}=\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial y}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{z}-\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x},\left(21\right)$

$\overrightarrow{c}=\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}-\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}.\left(22\right)$

*B*

_{ y }and

*B*

_{ x }with respect to

*z*. Thus also with that system a direct acquisition of the pseudo current density map is possible (cf. Fig. 10).

Finally, the newer vectormagnetometer systems [35, 36] also allow an appropriate combination of partial derivatives leading to

$\overrightarrow{c}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial y}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}-\frac{\partial {B}_{z}}{\partial x}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}+\frac{\partial {B}_{y}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{x}-\frac{\partial {B}_{x}}{\partial z}{\overrightarrow{e}}_{y}\right).\left(23\right)$

Again, the same pseudo current density map occurs, but the signal to noise ratio will be enhanced, as all three vector components of $\overrightarrow{B}$($\overrightarrow{r}$) are utilized.

### Visualizing dynamics by creating a sequence of pseudo current density maps for MCG data

The perception of dynamic phenomena is considerably enhanced by viewing movies.

*B*

_{ z }-map with its zero-isofield-line.

## Conclusion

In this work we presented examples of electrophysiological measurements where the use of PCD-maps is meaningful. PCD-maps allow in these selected cases an estimate of the underlying currents and also of the temporal behavior of the current propagation. On the other hand, the PCD-maps are only a 2D-presentation of a 3D-current distribution and may deviate considerable from the real current distribution.

We described the analytical basis of PCD-maps and showed that there exist alternative PCD-map presentations if other field components then *B*_{
z
}are also taken into account. Additionally we extended the PCD-map method to spherical coordinates as used in MEG.

PCD-maps are very interesting nowadays due to hardware realizations by special designed coil configurations or vector magnetometers. Vector magnetometry allows the recording of all magnetic field components and thus the direct realization of all proposed PCD-map cases.

The advantages of pseudo current density maps besides their intuitive character ("maximum signal is where the action is") are their model- and hardware-independence. While sophisticated inverse methods and filter techniques (e.g. the synthetic aperture beamformer [37]) may lead to more exact results with respect to the real current density distribution, they are hard to validate and require advanced data processing. In multicentric clinical studies, where comparability of measurement results between different groups is a key issue, PCD-maps might serve as a basis to exchange results. PCD-maps from such different SQUID-systems as those with planar horizontal, planar vertical magnetometers or gradiometers, or vectormagnetometers differ only slightly and are still traceable back to the original measurement results (up to an additive constant).

## Declarations

### Acknowledgements

The biomagnetic measurements for the example MCG-signal were obtained in a study described in reference 38. The medical writer of this paper (A.M.) was the responsible medical investigator of that study which had been funded by the German Federal Ministry for Education, Research and Technology under Grant No. 01 KX 9912/8.

## Authors’ Affiliations

## References

- Cohen D, Lepeschkin E, Hosaka H, Massell B, Myers G: Part I — Abnormal Patterns and Physiological Variations in Magnetocardiograms. J Electrocardiol. 1976, 9: 398-409. 10.1016/S0022-0736(76)80040-4.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Cohen D, Hosaka H: Part II — Magnetic Field Produced by a Current Dipole. J Electrocardiol. 1976, 9: 409-417. 10.1016/S0022-0736(76)80041-6.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hosaka H, Cohen D, Cuffin BN, Horacek BM: Part III — The Effect of the Torso Boundaries on the Magnetocardiogram. J Electrocardiol. 1976, 9: 418-425. 10.1016/S0022-0736(76)80042-8.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hosaka H, Cohen D: Part IV — Visual Determination of Generators of the Magnetocardiogram. J Electrocardiol. 1976, 9: 426-432. 10.1016/S0022-0736(76)80043-X.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wikswo JP: The Magnetic Inverse Problem for NDE. SQUID Sensors: Fundamentals, Fabrication and Applications. Edited by: Weinstock H. 1996, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 629-695.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tan S: Linear System Imaging and its Applications to Magnetic Measurements by SQUID Magnetometers. PhD dissertation. 1992, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Vanderbilt UniversityGoogle Scholar
- Miyashita T, Kandori A, Tsukada K, Sato M, Terada Y, Horigome H, Mitsui T: Construction of Tangential Vectors from Normal Cardiac Magnetic Field Components. Proc 20th Ann Int Conf IEEE/EMBS Oct. 29-Nov.1, Hong Kong. 1998, 520-523.Google Scholar
- Hailer B, Chaikovsky I, Auth-Eisernitz S, Schäfer H, Steinberg F, Grönemeyer DHW: Magnetocardiography in Coronary Artery Disease with a New System in an Unshielded Setting. Clin Cardiol. 2003, 26: 465-471.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nenonen J, Montonen J, Koskinen R: Surface Gradient Analysis of Atrial Activation from Magnetocardiographic Maps. Int J Bioelectromagnetism. 2003, 5: 98-99.Google Scholar
- [http://www.cryoton.webzone.ru/softmcg.htm]
- Hailer B, Van Leeuwen P, Chaikovsky I, Auth-Eisernitz S, Schäfer H, Grönemeyer D: The value of magnetocardiography in the course of coronary intervention. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2005, 10 (2): 188-96. 10.1111/j.1542-474X.2005.05625.x.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hailer B, Chaikovsky I, Auth-Eisernitz S, Schafer H, Van Leeuwen P: The value of magnetocardiography in patients with and without relevant stenoses of the coronary arteries using an unshielded system. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2005, 28 (1): 8-16. 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2005.09318.x.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Koch H: Recent advances in magnetocardiography. J Electrocardiol. 2004, 37 (Suppl): 117-22. 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2004.08.035.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Shimizu W, Yokokawa M, Kamakura S, Miyatake K, Murakami M, Miyashita T, Ogata K, Tsukada K: Reconstruction of action potential of repolarization in patients with congenital long-QT syndrome. Phys Med Biol. 2004, 49 (10): 2103-15. 10.1088/0031-9155/49/10/019.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Shimizu W, Yokokawa M, Noda T, Kamakura S, Miyatake K, Murakami M, Miyashita T, Ogata K, Tsukada K: Identifying patterns of spatial current dispersion that characterise and separate the Brugada syndrome and complete right-bundle branch block. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2004, 42 (2): 236-44. 10.1007/BF02344637.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Shimizu W, Yokokawa M, Maruo T, Kanzaki H, Nakatani S, Kamakura S, Miyatake K, Murakami M, Miyashita T, Ogata K, Tsukada K: Detection of spatial repolarization abnormalities in patients with LQT1 and LQT2 forms of congenital long-QT syndrome. Physiol Meas. 2002, 23 (4): 603-14. 10.1088/0967-3334/23/4/301.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sato M, Terada Y, Mitsui T, Miyashita T, Kandori A, Tsukada K: Visualization of atrial excitation by magnetocardiogram. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2002, 18 (4): 305-12. 10.1023/A:1015597910933.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Kanzaki H, Miyatake K, Hashimoto S, Itoh S, Tanaka N, Miyashita T, Tsukada K: A method for detecting myocardial abnormality by using a current-ratio map calculated from an exercise-induced magnetocardiogram. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2001, 39 (1): 29-34. 10.1007/BF02345263.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tsukada K, Miyashita T, Kandori A, Mitsui T, Terada Y, Sato M, Shiono J, Horigome H, Yamada S, Yamaguchi I: An iso-integral mapping technique using magnetocardiogram, and its possible use for diagnosis of ischemic heart disease. Int J Card Imaging. 2000, 16 (1): 55-66. 10.1023/A:1006376326755.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Kanzaki H, Miyatake K, Hashimoto S, Itoh S, Tanaka N, Miyashita T, Tsukada K: A method for detecting myocardial abnormality by using a total current-vector calculated from ST-segment deviation of a magnetocardiogram signal. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2001, 39 (1): 21-8. 10.1007/BF02345262.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Weber Dos Santos R, Kosch O, Steinhoff U, Bauer S, Trahms L, Koch H: MCG to ECG source differences: measurements and a two-dimensional computer model study. J Electrocardiol. 2004, 37 (Suppl): 123-7. 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2004.08.036.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Miyashita T, Tsukada K, Hosono T, Miyashita S, Chiba Y, Horigome H, Shigemitsu S, Asaka M: Prenatal diagnosis of QT prolongation by fetal magnetocardiogram – use of QRS and T-wave current-arrow maps. Physiol Meas. 2001, 22 (2): 377-87. 10.1088/0967-3334/22/2/309.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Hosono T, Kanagawa T, Miyashita S, Chiba Y, Murakami M, Miyashita T, Tsukada K: Detection of atrial-flutter and atrial-fibrillation waveforms by fetal magnetocardiogram. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2002, 40 (2): 213-7. 10.1007/BF02348127.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hosono T, Shinto M, Chiba Y, Kandori A, Tsukada K: Prenatal diagnosis of fetal complete atrioventricular block with QT prolongation and alternating ventricular pacemakers using multi-channel magnetocardiography and current-arrow maps. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2002, 17 (3): 173-6. 10.1159/000048033.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Oe H, Miyashita K, Ohira S, Naritomi H, Chiba Y, Ogata K, Murakami M, Miyashita T, Tsukada K: Magneto-encephalographic measurement of neural activity during period of vertigo induced by cold caloric stimulation. Neurosci Res. 2003, 46 (3): 281-8. 10.1016/S0168-0102(03)00092-0.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Oe H, Kandori A, Murakami M, Miyashita K, Tsukada K, Naritomi H: Cortical functional abnormality assessed by auditory-evoked magnetic fields and therapeutic approach in patients with chronic dizziness. Brain Res. 2002, 957 (2): 373-81. 10.1016/S0006-8993(02)03555-2.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Oe H, Miyashita K, Date H, Yamada N, Naritomi H, Chiba Y, Murakami M, Miyashita T, Tsukada K: Visualisation method of spatial interictal discharges in temporal epilepsy patients using magneto-encephalogram. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2002, 40 (3): 327-31. 10.1007/BF02344215.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Burghoff M, Mackert BM, Haberkorn W: Visualization of action currents in peripheral nerves from the biomagnetic field. Biomed Tech. 2005, 50 (Suppl 1/1): 179-80.Google Scholar
- Koch H: SQUID Magnetocardiography: Status and Perspectives. IEEE Trans Appl Superconductivity. 2001, 11: 49-59. 10.1109/77.919284.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hämäläinen M, Hari R, Ilmoniemi RJ, Knuutila J, Lounasmaa O: Magnetoencephalography – Theory, Instrumentation, and Applications to Noninvasive Studies of the Working Human Brain. Rev Mod Phys. 1993, 65: 413-497. 10.1103/RevModPhys.65.413.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kosch O, Burghoff M, Jazbinsek V, Steinhoff U, Trontelj Z, Trahms L: Extended source models in integrated body surface potential and magnetic field mapping. Biomed Eng. 2001, 46 (Suppl 2): 144-146.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sarvas J: Basic Mathematical and Electromagnetic Concepts of the Biomagnetic Inverse Problem. Phys Med Biol. 1987, 32: 11-22. 10.1088/0031-9155/32/1/004.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hämäläinen MS: A 24-Channel Planar Gradiometer: System Design and Analysis of Neuromagnetic Data. Advances in Biomagnetism. Edited by: Williamson SJ, Hoke M, Stroink G, Kotani M. 1989, New York: Plenum Press, 639-644.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kandori A, Tsukada K, Haruta Y, Noda Y, Terada Y, Mitsui T, Sekihara K: Reconstruction of two-dimensional Current Distribution from Tangential MCG measurement. Phys Med Biol. 1996, 41: 1705-1716. 10.1088/0031-9155/41/9/010.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Burghoff M, Schleyerbach H, Drung D, Trahms L, Koch H: A Vector Magnetometer Module for Biomagnetic Application. IEEE Trans Appl Superconductivity. 1999, 9: 4069-4072. 10.1109/77.783920.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Stolz R, Zakosarenko V, Schulz M, Chwala A, Fritzsch L, Meyer HG, Koestlin EO: Magnetic full-tensor SQUID gradiometer system for geophysical applications. The Leading Edge. 2006, 25 (2): 178-180. 10.1190/1.2172308.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Robinson SE, Vrba J: Functional Neuroimaging by Synthetic Aperture Magnetometry (SAM). Recent Advances in Biomagnetism, Proc 11th Int Conf Biomagnetism. Edited by: Yoshimoto T, Kotani M, Kuriki S, Karibe H, Nakasato N. 1999, Sendai: Tohoku University Press, 302-305.Google Scholar
- Morguet A, Behrens S, Kosch O, Lange C, Zabel M, Selbig D, Munz DL, Schultheiss HP, Koch H: Myocardial Viability Evaluation using Magnetocardiography in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease. Coronary Artery Disease. 2004, 15 (3): 155-162. 10.1097/00019501-200405000-00004.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar

## Copyright

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.