Lead-DBS
  • Home
  • About
    • Quickstart Primer (Post-OP MR-Scans)
    • Data & Code inclusion philosophy
    • Quickstart Primer (Post-OP CT-Scans)
    • Deep Brain Stimulation
    • Lead Connectome
    • Publications
    • List of Lead-DBS dependencies
    • Citing Lead-DBS
  • News
  • Contact
  • Help/Support
    • Manual
    • Knowledge Base
      • Atlases/Resources
        • Subcortical Atlases (MNI-Space)
        • Cortical Atlas Parcellations (MNI-Space)
        • Macaque Atlases (MNI-Space)
        • The DISTAL atlas
        • FEM-based VTA model
        • Normative Connectomes
      • Lead-DBS Methods
        • Subcortical Electrophysiology Mapping (SEM)
        • AC/PC to MNI conversion
        • Connectivity Benefit Mapping
      • Other Videos
      • Screenshots
      • Walkthrough-Videos
    • Slack User Channel
    • Forum
  • Workshops
    • Past workshops
      • Berlin 2016
      • Shanghai September 2018
      • Hamburg February 2019
    • Berlin September 2019
    • Machine Learning – Berlin September 2019
    • Brisbane February 2020
  • Download
  • Lead-Connectome
  • Search
  • Menu Menu

PaCER

You are here: Home1 / Forums2 / Support forum ARCHIVED – Please use Slack Channel instead3 / PaCER4

Tagged: lead reconstruction, polynomial approximation

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • 05/11/2018 at 3:06 PM #4654
    m.versteijlen
    Participant

    Dear lead-dbs,
    the results from running lead reconstruction show straight leads. Therefore I was wondering if the latest version of PaCER, including the polynomial approximation had been implemented.
    Kind regards,
    Monique

    05/11/2018 at 3:11 PM #4655
    andreashorn
    Keymaster

    Hi Monique,

    no, we implemented a 0-polynomial version of PaCER. For curved leads, I’d recommend to try the PaCER standalone. It’s not really planned to implement support for curved leads since this would also result in a lot of adaptions to our VTA model and microelectrode recording tool, etc. We feel that for most applications (if interest is only on the contacts), a straight model is a good approximation. Of course, curved leads could be interesting if the trajectory itself is of interest (but can be easily calculated using PaCER standalone.

    Hope this helps,
    Andy

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • The forum ‘Support forum ARCHIVED – Please use Slack Channel instead’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Your Account

Log In
Register

Forum Statistics

Registered Users
131
Forums
1
Topics
185
Replies
607
Topic Tags
81

Subscribe to our newsletter

Latest Tweets

  • Tweet Avatar
    leaddbs
    @leaddbs
    RT @neumann_wj: Our #ECG contamination paper on implantable bidirectional brain stimulation systems is live. Great and fast paced c… https://t.co/Rkwp86ZxKE

    3d
  • Tweet Avatar
    leaddbs
    @leaddbs
    RT @andreashorn_: Clinically relevant study showing ECG artifacts are higher when IPG implanted on the left side. 👏👏 this will likely… https://t.co/ostng3NZxN

    3d
  • Tweet Avatar
    leaddbs
    @leaddbs
    Interesting single center case series with CM + ANT-DBS vs. CM-DBS only in 16 children and adults with drug-resista… https://t.co/0gzbgQlHud

    4d

Recent Posts

  • Lead-DBS on the cover of NeuroImage
  • Lead-DBS on the cover of Biological Psychiatry
  • Lead-DBS on the cover of Annals of Neurology
  • Crucial methodological updates for Lead-DBS
  • 2nd Lead-DBS Workshop in Shanghai, China

Archives

  • September 2020
  • June 2019
  • November 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • March 2018
  • November 2017
  • September 2017
  • July 2017
  • April 2017
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • March 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • April 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014

Impressum & Datenschutzerklärung

Scroll to top