Cited by 70Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringNerve injury and regenerationUndergraduate Neuroscience Education and Research

Chronic multichannel neural recordings from soft regenerative microchannel electrodes during gait

Open access
Musick, Katherine M., Rigosa, Jacopo, Narasimhan, Shreya, Wurth, Sophie, Capogrosso, Marco, Chew, Daniel J., Fawcett, James W., Micera, Silvestro +1 more·2015·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Reliably interfacing a nerve with an electrode array is one of the approaches to restore motor and sensory functions after an injury to the peripheral nerve. Accomplishing this with current technologies is challenging as the electrode-neuron interface often degrades over time, and surrounding myoelectric signals contaminate the neuro-signals in awake, moving animals. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential of microchannel electrode implants to monitor over time and in freely moving animals, neural activity from regenerating nerves. We designed and fabricated implants with silicone rubber and elastic thin-film metallization. Each implant carries an eight-by-twelve matrix of parallel microchannels (of 120 × 110 μm(2) cross-section and 4 mm length) and gold thin-film electrodes embedded in the floor of ten of the microchannels. After sterilization, the soft, multi-lumen electrode implant is sutured between the stumps of the sciatic nerve. Over a period of three months and in four rats, the microchannel electrodes recorded spike activity from the regenerating sciatic nerve. Histology indicates mini-nerves formed of axons and supporting cells regenerate robustly in the implants. Analysis of the recorded spikes and gait kinematics over the ten-week period suggests firing patterns collected with the microchannel electrode implant can be associated with different phases of gait.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/srep14363

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In vivo experiments have shown fascicles regenerated through the regenerative electrode for every implant, after which stable long-term recording or stimulation up to 3 months was possible.

    “However, in vivo experiments have been performed in which the fascicles regenerated through the electrode for every implant after which stable long term recording or stimulation (up to 3 months) was possible (Musick et al., 2015; MacEwan et al., 2016).”

    From Update on Peripheral Nerve Electrodes for Closed-Loop Neuroprosthetics (2018) · cites this paper as Musick et al., 2015

  • Originally made from polyimide, more recent microchannel designs are built from stretchable and softer materials such as PDMS.

    “While originally made from polyimide (FitzGerald et al., 2012), more recent microchannel designs are built from stretchable and softer materials such as PDMS (Musick et al., 2015; Lancashire et al., 2016).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Musick, K. M., Rigosa, J., Narasimhan, S., Wurth, S., Capogrosso, M., Chew, D. J., Fawcett, J. W., Micera, S., & Lacour, S. P.
Affiliations
  • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
  • Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna (IT)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Lacour, Stéphanie P.
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2015-09-24
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
14363-14363
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2198380397
Cited by
70
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • SDL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Fondation Bertarelli
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/H00727X/1)
  • FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (259419)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Nerve injury and regeneration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Undergraduate Neuroscience Education and Research
Keywords
peripheral nerve regeneration, sciatic nerve, chronic neural recording, spiking activity, gait kinematics, gold thin film electrodes, silicone rubber implants, freely moving animals, rat model
MeSH terms
Animals, Electrodes, Implanted, Gait, Male, Microelectrodes, Neurons, Peripheral Nerves, Sciatic Nerve, Rats, Electrophysiological Phenomena

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