Magnetoencephalography: an investigational tool or a routine clinical technique?

Abstract

Magnetoencephalography (MEG) is a relatively novel noninvasive technique, with a much shorter history than EEG, that conveys neurophysiological information complementary to that provided by EEG, with high temporal and spatial resolution. Despite its a priori, highly competitive profile, the role of MEG in the clinical setting is still controversial. We briefly review the major obstacles MEG faces in becoming a routine clinical test and the different strategies needed to bypass them. The high cost and complexity associated with MEG equipment are powerful hindrances to wide acceptance of this relatively new technique in clinical practice. The most straightforward advantage is based on the relative facility of MEG recordings in the process of source localization, which also carries some degree of uncertainty, thus partly explaining why the development of clinical applications of MEG has been so slow. Obviously, a decrease in the cost and the elaboration of semiautomatic protocols that could reduce the complexity of the studies and favor the development of consensual strategies, as well as a major effort on the part of clinicians to identify clinical issues where MEG could be decisive, would be most welcome.