Konstantin K. Shcherbina, Grand PhD in Medical sciences (Dr. Med. Sci), Director of the Institute of Prosthetics and Orthotics of the Federal Scientific Center of Rehabilitation of the Disabled named after G.A. Albrecht, 50 Bestuzhevskaya Street, 195067 St. Petersburg, Russian Federation. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Mihail A. Golovin, Master of Applied Physics, Head of the Department of the Institute of Prosthetics and Orthotics of the Federal Scientific Center of Rehabilitation of the Disabled named after G.A. Albrecht, 50 Bestuzhevskaya Street, 195067 St. Petersburg, Russian Federation. E-mail: email@example.com
Olga A. Vladimirova, MD of General Medicine, administrator of the Institute of Prosthetics and Orthotics of the Federal Scientific Center of Rehabilitation of the Disabled named after G.A. Albrecht, 50 Bestuzhevskaya Street, 195067 St. Petersburg, Russian Federation.
In the heading: Original researches
Year: 2021 Volume: 3 Journal number: 1
Article type: scientific and practical
Introduction. Prostheses and orthoses with an external energy source are used, including in the case of complete or partial absence of the function of the limb segment. One of the sources of information for the formation of control commands for such technical means of rehabilitation is the registration of signals of electrical activity of nerves.
For this purpose, chronically implantable invasive sensors are used. A sensor is considered long-term implantable if it is installed on a nerve for 30 days or more. Such a sensor consists of an interface installed on an axon (a process of a neuron), and a system for transmitting registered signals. The interface is most often an array of electrodes.
The use of such a system in the practice of prosthetics and orthotics is difficult due to a number of problems.
The most significant of them is the regeneration of the peripheral nerve around the microelectrode array during 9–12 months. This paper will provide an overview of the types of existing microelectrode arrays used for implantation on peripheral nerves, and ways to reduce the immune response to a foreign body and inhibit the regeneration of peripheral nerves.
Aim. Analysis of the issue of long-term registration of signals from the nerves of the peripheral nervous system.
Materials and methods. The study was conducted on the basis of the analysis of scientific literature on the topic under study, materials of scientific databases ScienceDirect, Google Scholar using the method of analyzing publication activity according to the proposed criteria for the period from 1972 to 2019.
Results. A review of 25 publications was conducted. 4 main types of microelectrode arrays for recording electrical activity by direct lead-off from the nerve have been identified. It is established that there are 3 groups of methods for preventing the attenuation of the recorded signals during the installation of the electrodes. To achieve the best result, you should use these methods together. As a result of the analysis, according to the proposed criteria, the most promising method of using microelectrodes for implantation on peripheral nerves was determined: extra- neural electrodes made of bioavailable material, such as Parylene C. To reduce the immune response at the site of implantation of the electrode, local delivery of drugs is possible, dexamethasone is most often used.
Summary. The analysis showed a large number of existing approaches to the issue of extending the useful life of electrodes implanted on the axons of the nerves of the peripheral nervous system. Their systematization allows us to determine the ways that are most promising for practical application.
1. Wang R, Yu H, Li Z. Microelectrode Array: Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (eds. O. Huang), Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018:1379-1411.
2. Russell С, Roche А, Chakrabarty S. Peripheral nerve bionic interface: a review of electrodes. International Journal of Intelligent Robotics and Applications. 2019;3:11-8. D0I:10.1007/s41315-019-00086-3.
3. Larson C, Meng A. A review for the peripheral nerve interface designer. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 2020:332. DOI:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2019.108523.
4. Safin DR, Pil’shhikov IS, Urakseev MA, Migranova RM. Primenenie implantiruemy’x mikroe’lektrodov v sistemax upravleniya protezami [Application of implantable microelectrodes in prosthetic control systems]. Vestnik Ufimskogo gosudarstvennogo aviacionnogo texnicheskogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Ufa State Aviation Technical University]. 2010(14);2(37):104-9 (In Russian).
5. Brindley G. Electrode-arrays for making long-lasting electrical connexion to spinal roots. Journal of physiology. 1972;222(2):135-6.
6. Weinberg S. Helical nerve electrode us5251634, 1993.
7. Tyler D, Durand D. Alteration of neural geometry for selective nerve stimulation. Paper presented at the 19th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. ‘Magnificent Milestones and Emerging Opportunities in Medical Engineering’ (Cat. No.97CH36136), Chicago, IL. USA, October 30 – November 2, 1997.
8. FitzGerald J, Lacour S, McMahon S, Fawcett J. Microchannels as Axonal Amplifiers. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering. 2008;55(3):1136-46. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2007.909533.
9. Badia J, Boretius T, Pascual-Font A, Udina E, Stieglitz T, Navarro X. Biocompatibility of Chronically Implanted Transverse Intrafascicular Multichannel Electrode (TIME) in the Rat Sciatic Nerve. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering. 2011;58(8):2324-32. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2011.2153850.
10. Mortimer J, Agnew W, Horch K, Citron P, Creasey G, Kantor C. Perspectives on New Electrode Technology for Stimulating Peripheral Nerves with Implantable Motor Prostheses. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering. 1995;3(2):145-54. DOI: 10.1109/86.392373.
11. Branner A, Stein R, Normann R. Selective Stimulation of Cat Sciatic Nerve Using an Array of Varying- Length Microelectrodes. Journal of Neurophysiology. 2001:85(4):1585-94. DOI: 10.1152/jn.2001.85.4.1585.
12. Koole P, Holsheimer J, Struijk J, Verloop A. Recruitment Characteristics of Nerve Fascicles Stimulated by a Multigroove Electrode. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineeringэ. 1997;5(1):40-50. DOI: 10.1109/86.559348.
13. Tyler D., Durand D. () A Slowly Penetrating Interfascicular Nerve Electrode for Selective Activation of Peripheral Nerves. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering. 1997;5(1):51-61. DOI: 10.1109/86.559349.
14. Kim H, Heo D, Lee Y., Lee S, Kang J, Lee S. Kwon L, Do S. Biological assessments of multifunctional hydrogeldecorated implantable neural cuf electrode for clinical neurology application. Scientific Reports (electronic journal). 2017;7(15245):1-14. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/ s41598- 017-15551-x.pdf (accessed 19 December 2019).
15. Cobo A, Boyajian B, Larson C, Scholten K, PikovV, Meng E. A parylene cuff electrode for peripheral nerve recording and drug delivery. Paper presented at the IEEE 30th International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS). Las Vegas, NV, USA, January22 – 26, 2017. DOI: 10.1109/MEMSYS.2017.7863454.
16. Ju M, Lin C, Fan J, Chen R. Transverse elasticity and blood perfusion of sciatic nerves under in situ circular compression. Journal of Biomechanics. 2006;39(1):97- 102. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.10.026.
17. Eldabe S, Buchser E, Duarte R. Complications of Spinal Cord Stimulation and Peripheral Nerve Stimulation Techniques: A Review of the Literature Pain Medicine. 2016;17(2):325-36. DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnv025.
18. Yu H, Xiong W, Zhang H, Wang W, Li Z. A Parylene Self-Locking Cuff Electrode for Peripheral Nerve Stimulation and Recording. Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems. 2014;23(5):1025-35. DOI: 10.1109/JMEMS.2014.2333733.
19. Lecomte A, Degache A, Descamps E, Dahan L, Bergaud C. In vitro and in vivo biostability assessment of chronically-implanted Parylene C neural sensors.
Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical. 2017:251:1001-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2017.05.057.
20. Guo L. The Pursuit of Chronically Reliable Neural Interfaces: A Materials Perspective Liang. Froniers in Neuroscience (electronic journal). 2016;10(599): 1-6. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/ articles/10.3389/fnins.2016.00599/full (accessed 19 December 2019). DOI:10.3389/fnins.2016.00599.
21. Hempstead B. Dissecting the Diverse Actions of Pro- and Mature Neurotrophins. Current Alzheimer Research. 2006;3(1):19-24. DOI: 10.2174/156720506775697061.
22. Radovsky A, Van Vleet J. Effects of dexamethasone elution on tissue reaction around stimulating electrodes of endocardial pacing leads in dogs. American Heart Journal. 1989;117(6):1288-98.
23. Vince V, Brelen M, Delbeke J, Colin I. Anti-TNF-a reduces the inflammatory reaction associated with cuff electrode implantation around the sciatic nerve. Journal of Neuroimmunology. 2005;165(1-2):121-8.
24 Gunter C, Delbeke J, Ortiz-Catalan M. Safety of long-term electrical peripheral nerve stimulation: review of the state of the art. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. 2019;16(13). DOI: 10.1186/s12984-018-0474-8.
25. Christie BP, Freeberg M, Memberg WD. et al. Long- term stability of stimulating spiral nerve cuff electrodes on human peripheral nerves. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. 2017;14(70). DOI: 10.1186/s12984-017-0285-3.
26. Rijnbeek E. H., Eleveld N., Olthuis W. Update on Peripheral Nerve Electrodes for Closed-Loop Neuroprosthetics. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 2018;12(350). DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00350.