In-vivo Evaluation of Chronically Implanted Neural Microelectrode Arrays Modified with Poly (3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) Nanotubes

The interface between neural prostheses and neural tissue plays a significant role in the long term performance of these devices. Conducting polymers have been used to modify the electrical properties of neural microelectrodes. The objective of this study was to evaluate recording chronic neural activity of neural microelectrodes that were modified with nanofibers-templated of poly (3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT) nanotubes over seven week periods using impedance spectroscopy and signal-to-noise ratio measurements. PEDOT nanotubes-coated sites were found to have lower impedance and higher signal-to-noise ratio than control site.

[1]  C.R. Miller,et al.  Suitability of the Cingulate Cortex for Neural Control , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[2]  M. Abidian,et al.  Conducting‐Polymer Nanotubes for Controlled Drug Release , 2006, Advanced materials.

[3]  D. Robinson,et al.  The electrical properties of metal microelectrodes , 1968 .

[4]  D. Bozentka.  Biological performance of materials: fundamentals of biocompatibility , 1993 .

[5]  David J. Anderson,et al.  Electrochemical deposition and characterization of conducting polymer polypyrrole/PSS on multichannel neural probes , 2001 .

[6]  David C. Martin,et al.  Chronic neural recordings using silicon microelectrode arrays electrochemically deposited with a poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT) film , 2006, Journal of neural engineering.

[7]  Thomas M. McKenna,et al.  Enabling Technologies for Cultured Neural Networks , 1994 .

[8]  G. Paxinos,et al.  The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates , 1983 .

[9]  S S Stensaas,et al.  The reaction of the cerebral cortex to chronically implanted plastic needles. , 1976, Acta neuropathologica.

[10]  Justin C. Williams,et al.  Chronic neural recording using silicon-substrate microelectrode arrays implanted in cerebral cortex , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[11]  P. Kennedy,et al.  Restoration of neural output from a paralyzed patient by a direct brain connection , 1998, Neuroreport.

[12]  Karim G. Oweiss,et al.  Noise reduction in multichannel neural recordings using a new array wavelet denoising algorithm , 2001, Neurocomputing.

[13]  David C. Martin,et al.  Conducting polymers grown in hydrogel scaffolds coated on neural prosthetic devices. , 2004, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[14]  Buddy D. Ratner,et al.  Biomaterials Science: An Introduction to Materials in Medicine , 1996 .

[15]  Dawn M. Taylor,et al.  Direct Cortical Control of 3D Neuroprosthetic Devices , 2002, Science.

[16]  David C. Martin,et al.  Neuronal cell loss accompanies the brain tissue response to chronically implanted silicon microelectrode arrays , 2005, Experimental Neurology.

[17]  D. Edell,et al.  Factors influencing the biocompatibility of insertable silicon microshafts in cerebral cortex , 1992, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[18]  G. Gross,et al.  Stimulation of monolayer networks in culture through thin-film indium-tin oxide recording electrodes , 1993, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[19]  D. Szarowski,et al.  Brain responses to micro-machined silicon devices , 2003, Brain Research.

[20]  Maarten Jansen,et al.  Noise Reduction by Wavelet Thresholding , 2001 .

[21]  D. Szarowski,et al.  Cerebral Astrocyte Response to Micromachined Silicon Implants , 1999, Experimental Neurology.