Materials for neural interfaces

The treatment of disorders of the nervous system poses a major clinical challenge. Development of neuromodulation (i.e., interfacing electronics to nervous tissue to modulate its function) has provided patients with neuronal-related deficits a new tool to regain lost function. Even though, in principle, electrical stimulation and recording by interfacing technology is simple and straightforward, each presents different challenges. In stimulation, the challenge lies in targeting the effects of stimulation on precise brain regions, as each region specializes for particular functions on a millimeter scale. In practice, our experience with deep brain stimulation for treating Parkinson’s disease reveals that stimulation of larger regions of the brain can be relatively well tolerated. However, the task of fabricating an ideal electrode that performs reliably for long periods of time has been daunting. The primary obstacle in successful interfacing comes from integration of electrodes (“foreign” material) into the nervous system (biological material). The second tier of complexity is added by the need for the electrodes to “sense” signals emanating from individual neurons, an estimated microenvironment of 10 to 20 microns in diameter. Materials design and technology impact electrode design—with their size, shape, mechanical properties, and composition all being actively optimized to enable chronic, stable recordings of neural activity. The articles in this issue discuss designing interfacing technology to “listen to the nervous system” from a materials perspective. These include identification of materials with a potential for in vivo development, electrodes with various material types, including natural nanocomposites, and optical neural interfacing.

[1]  A. Levey,et al.  Implanted neural electrodes cause chronic, local inflammation that is correlated with local neurodegeneration , 2009, Journal of neural engineering.

[2]  Warren M Grill,et al.  Implanted neural interfaces: biochallenges and engineered solutions. , 2009, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[3]  G. Wallace,et al.  Conducting polymers for neural interfaces: challenges in developing an effective long-term implant. , 2008, Biomaterials.

[4]  Andrew S. Whitford,et al.  Cortical control of a prosthetic arm for self-feeding , 2008, Nature.

[5]  D. Tyler,et al.  Stimuli-Responsive Polymer Nanocomposites Inspired by the Sea Cucumber Dermis , 2008, Science.

[6]  W. Reichert.  Indwelling Neural Implants : Strategies for Contending with the In Vivo Environment , 2007 .

[7]  Ravi V. Bellamkonda,et al.  Extraction Force and Cortical Tissue Reaction of Silicon Microelectrode Arrays Implanted in the Rat Brain , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[8]  Wei He,et al.  Nanoscale laminin coating modulates cortical scarring response around implanted silicon microelectrode arrays , 2006, Journal of neural engineering.

[9]  J. Fellous,et al.  In vitro model of glial scarring around neuroelectrodes chronically implanted in the CNS. , 2006, Biomaterials.

[10]  D. Humphrey,et al.  Long-term gliosis around chronically implanted platinum electrodes in the Rhesus macaque motor cortex , 2006, Neuroscience Letters.

[11]  Jon A. Mukand,et al.  Neuronal ensemble control of prosthetic devices by a human with tetraplegia , 2006, Nature.

[12]  P. Janmey,et al.  Tissue Cells Feel and Respond to the Stiffness of Their Substrate , 2005, Science.

[13]  M. Block,et al.  Microglia and inflammation-mediated neurodegeneration: Multiple triggers with a common mechanism , 2005, Progress in Neurobiology.

[14]  Miriam Zacksenhouse,et al.  Cortical Ensemble Adaptation to Represent Velocity of an Artificial Actuator Controlled by a Brain-Machine Interface , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[15]  Patrick A Tresco,et al.  Chronic response of adult rat brain tissue to implants anchored to the skull. , 2004, Biomaterials.

[16]  David M. Santucci,et al.  Learning to Control a Brain–Machine Interface for Reaching and Grasping by Primates , 2003, PLoS biology.

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

[18]  F. Mussa-Ivaldi,et al.  Brain–machine interfaces: computational demands and clinical needs meet basic neuroscience , 2003, Trends in Neurosciences.

[19]  Eberhart Zrenner.  Will Retinal Implants Restore Vision? , 2002, Science.

[20]  Jerald D. Kralik,et al.  Real-time prediction of hand trajectory by ensembles of cortical neurons in primates , 2000, Nature.

[21]  D. J. Warren,et al.  A neural interface for a cortical vision prosthesis , 1999, Vision Research.

[22]  Miguel A. L. Nicolelis,et al.  Real-time control of a robot arm using simultaneously recorded neurons in the motor cortex , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

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

[24]  G. Loeb,et al.  Visual sensations produced by intracortical microstimulation of the human occipital cortex , 1990, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[25]  Nicholas G. Hatsopoulos,et al.  Brain-machine interface: Instant neural control of a movement signal , 2002, Nature.