Recent advances in neural electrode–tissue interfaces
Open accessAbstract
Neurotechnology is facing an exponential growth in the recent decades. Neural electrode-tissue interface research has been well recognized as an instrumental component of neurotechnology development. While satisfactory long-term performance was demonstrated in some applications, such as cochlear implants and deep brain stimulators, more advanced neural electrode devices requiring higher resolution for single unit recording or microstimulation still face significant challenges in reliability and longevity. In this article, we review the most recent findings that contribute to our current understanding of the sources of poor reliability and longevity in neural recording or stimulation, including the material failure, biological tissue response and the interplay between the two. The newly developed characterization tools are introduced from electrophysiology models, molecular and biochemical analysis, material characterization to live imaging. The effective strategies that have been applied to improve the interface are also highlighted. Finally, we discuss the challenges and opportunities in improving the interface and achieving seamless integration between the implanted electrodes and neural tissue both anatomically and functionally.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The electrode-tissue interface is one of the most critical elements of a neural interface from a mechanical, chemical and electrical point of view.
“The electrode-tissue interface is one of the most critical elements of a neural interface from a mechanical, chemical and electrical point of view [158,159].”
From Advances in visual prostheses: engineering and biological challenges (2022) · cites this paper as [158]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 111 · Cited by 99
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- [46]Karumbaiah L Relationship between intracortical electrode design and chronic recording function Biomaterials 2013 34 33 8061 74 23891081
- [57]Du ZJ Ultrasoft microwire neural electrodes improve chronic tissue integration Acta Biomater 2017 Du et al. examine the effects of chronic implantation of electrodes with young’s moduli close to that of neural tissues. Implanted soft wire electrodes evoked lower degrees of inflamation and exhibited higher neural density near the surface of the electrode when compared to stiff tungsten electrodes. PMC5512864 28185910
- [62]Luan L Ultraflexible nanoelectronic probes form reliable, glial scar–free neural integration Science Advances 2017 3 2 e1601966 28246640 PMC5310823
- [66]Patel PR Chronic in vivo stability assessment of carbon fiber microelectrode arrays J Neural Eng 2016 13 6 066002 27705958 PMC5118062
- Authors
- Woeppel, K., Yang, Q., & Cui, X. T.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cui, Xinyan Tracy
- Venue
- Current Opinion in Biomedical Engineering
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-12
- Volume
- 4
- Pages
- 21-31
- ISSN
- 2468-4511 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5798641
- OpenAlex
- W2760331177
- Cited by
- 99
- References
- 111
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 0.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- europepmc.org
- Locations
- Current Opinion in Biomedical Engineering (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- NIH (5R01NS062019)
- NINDS (1R01NS089688)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Analog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Undergraduate Neuroscience Education and Research
- Keywords
- neural recording, neurostimulation, electrode reliability, material failure, single-unit recording, microstimulation, live imaging, cochlear implants, deep brain stimulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
