» Articles » PMID: 19486899

Toward a Comparison of Microelectrodes for Acute and Chronic Recordings

Overview
Journal Brain Res
Specialty Neurology
Date 2009 Jun 3
PMID 19486899
Citations 118
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Several variations of microelectrode arrays are used to record and stimulate intracortical neuronal activity. Bypassing the immune response to maintain a stable recording interface remains a challenge. Companies and researchers are continuously altering the material compositions and geometries of the arrays in order to discover a combination that allows for a chronic and stable electrode-tissue interface. From this interface, they wish to obtain consistent quality recordings and a stable, low impedance pathway for charge injection over extended periods of time. Despite numerous efforts, no microelectrode array design has managed to evade the host immune response and remain fully functional. This study is an initial effort comparing several microelectrode arrays with fundamentally different configurations for use in an implantable epilepsy prosthesis. Specifically, NeuroNexus (Michigan) probes, Cyberkinetics (Utah) Silicon and Iridium Oxide arrays, ceramic-based thin-film microelectrode arrays (Drexel), and Tucker-Davis Technologies (TDT) microwire arrays are evaluated over a 31-day period in an animal model. Microelectrodes are compared in implanted rats through impedance, charge capacity, signal-to-noise ratio, recording stability, and elicited immune response. Results suggest significant variability within and between microelectrode types with no clear superior array. Some applications for the microelectrode arrays are suggested based on data collected throughout the longitudinal study. Additionally, specific limitations of assaying biological phenomena and comparing fundamentally different microelectrode arrays in a highly variable system are discussed with suggestions on how to improve the reliability of observed results and steps needed to develop a more standardized microelectrode design.

Citing Articles

Overcoming failure: improving acceptance and success of implanted neural interfaces.

Dalrymple A, Jones S, Fallon J, Shepherd R, Weber D Bioelectron Med. 2025; 11(1):6.

PMID: 40083033 PMC: 11907899. DOI: 10.1186/s42234-025-00168-7.


Dexamethasone-loaded platelet-inspired nanoparticles improve intracortical microelectrode recording performance.

Shoffstall A, Li L, Hartzler A, Menendez-Lustri D, Zhang J, Chen A Res Sq. 2025; .

PMID: 39989959 PMC: 11844648. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6018202/v1.


Laterality, sexual dimorphism, and human vagal projectome heterogeneity shape neuromodulation to vagus nerve stimulation.

Biscola N, Bartmeyer P, Beshay Y, Stern E, Mihaylov P, Powley T Commun Biol. 2024; 7(1):1536.

PMID: 39562711 PMC: 11576867. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-024-07222-1.


Electrode Surface Area Impacts Measurement of High Frequency Oscillations in Human Intracranial EEG.

Sindhu K, Pinto-Orellana M, Ombao H, Riba A, Phillips D, Olaya J IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2024; 71(11):3283-3292.

PMID: 38896508 PMC: 11723563. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2024.3416440.


Advanced age is not a barrier to chronic intracortical single-unit recording in rat cortex.

Nolta N, Christensen M, Tresco P Front Neurosci. 2024; 18:1389556.

PMID: 38817909 PMC: 11138162. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2024.1389556.