RESUMO
Combining Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) techniques with the recording of brain electrophysiological activity is an increasingly widespread approach in neuroscience. Particularly successful has been the simultaneous combination of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) and Electroencephalography (EEG). Unfortunately, the strong magnetic pulse required to effectively interact with brain activity inevitably induces artifacts in the concurrent EEG acquisition. Therefore, a careful but aggressive pre-processing is required to efficiently remove artifacts. Unfortunately, as already reported in the literature, different preprocessing approaches can introduce variability in the results. Here we aim at characterizing the three main TMS-EEG preprocessing pipelines currently available, namely ARTIST (Wu et al., 2018), TESA (Rogasch et al., 2017) and SOUND/SSP-SIR (Mutanen et al., 2018, 2016), providing an insight to researchers who need to choose between different approaches. Differently from previous works, we tested the pipelines using a synthetic TMS-EEG signal with a known ground-truth (the artifacts-free to-be-reconstructed signal). In this way, it was possible to assess the reliability of each pipeline precisely and quantitatively, providing a more robust reference for future research. In summary, we found that all pipelines performed well, but with differences in terms of the spatio-temporal precision of the ground-truth reconstruction. Crucially, the three pipelines impacted differently on the inter-trial variability, with ARTIST introducing inter-trial variability not already intrinsic to the ground-truth signal.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Human herpes virus (HHV8) is associated with Castleman's disease, primary effusion lymphoma, and the Kaposi's sarcoma (KS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Among 3815 solid organ transplants performed at our center between 1977 and 2003, five patients (0.1%) were identified with KS. RESULTS: There were one cardiac, one liver, and three renal allograft recipients of median age of 52 (range 38 to 60) years, three of whom were females. Three patients were of Italian and one of Turkish descent; only one patient was a native Austrian. The onset of the disease was 2.0, 7.5, 7.8, 9.4 months, and 22 years posttransplant. Diagnosis of KS was based in all cases on histology. The heart recipient developed a tumor on the planta pedis; one renal recipient, on both legs. The liver and the two remaining renal recipients presented with disseminated disease. Treatment in all cases consisted of reduction in immunosuppression, together with surgery (n = 1), chemotherapy (n = 1), or irradiation (n = 2). Furthermore, immunosuppression was switched in two cases from Tacrolimus to Sirolimus. In the liver recipient a complete response was achieved; he died, however, due to noncompliance followed by graft failure. One renal recipient died without evidence of recurrent disease from myocardial infarction. The cardiac and two renal recipients are alive between 4 months and 17 years with well-functioning grafts and no evidence of recurrent disease. DISCUSSION: HHV8-associated lesions seem to be extremely rare in the Central European transplant population. Nevertheless, awareness of KS is important for early diagnosis and optimal treatment.