Cited by 37Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesAnalog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design

Long-term stability of the chronic epidural wireless recorder WIMAGINE in tetraplegic patients

Open access
Larzabal, Christelle, Bonnet, Stéphane, Costecalde, Thomas, Auboiroux, Vincent, Charvet, Guillaume, Chabardes, Stéphan, Aksenova, Tetiana, Sauter-Starace, Fabien·2021·Journal of Neural Engineering

Abstract

Objective. The evaluation of the long-term stability of ElectroCorticoGram (ECoG) signals is an important scientific question as new implantable recording devices can be used for medical purposes such as Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) or brain monitoring. Approach. The long-term clinical validation of wireless implantable multi-channel acquisition system for generic interface with neurons (WIMAGINE), a wireless 64-channel epidural ECoG recorder was investigated. The WIMAGINE device was implanted in two quadriplegic patients within the context of a BCI protocol. This study focused on the ECoG signal stability in two patients bilaterally implanted in June 2017 (P1) and in November 2019 (P2). Methods . The ECoG signal was recorded at rest prior to each BCI session resulting in a 32 month and in a 14 month follow-up for P1 and P2 respectively. State-of-the-art signal evaluation metrics such as root mean square (RMS), the band power (BP), the signal to noise ratio (SNR), the effective bandwidth (EBW) and the spectral edge frequency (SEF) were used to evaluate stability of signal over the implantation time course. The time-frequency maps obtained from task-related motor activations were also studied to investigate the long-term selectivity of the electrodes. Main results. Based on temporal linear regressions, we report a limited decrease of the signal average level (RMS), spectral distribution (BP) and SNR, and a remarkable steadiness of the EBW and SEF. Time-frequency maps obtained during motor imagery, showed a high level of discrimination 1 month after surgery and also after 2 years. Conclusions. The WIMAGINE epidural device showed high stability over time. The signal evaluation metrics of two quadriplegic patients during 32 months and 14 months respectively provide strong evidence that this wireless implant is well-suited for long-term ECoG recording. Significance. These findings are relevant for the future of implantable BCIs, and could benefit other patients with spinal cord injury, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, neuromuscular diseases or drug-resistant epilepsy.

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 · 10.1088/1741-2552/ac2003

Cites

51 of 51 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?

  • A comparable robustness and stability of this computational and technological brain decoding framework has now been observed in two additional individuals with tetraplegia.

    “Third, a comparable robustness and stability of this computational and technological brain decoding framework has now been observed in two additional individuals with tetraplegia3,26,29.”

    From Walking naturally after spinal cord injury using a brain–spine interface (2023) · cites this paper as [29]

    The Discussion and Conclusion report stable WIMAGINE recordings in two tetraplegic patients enrolled in a BCI protocol. They do not establish comparable robustness of the full computational brain-decoding framework in two additional individuals: the paper evaluates recorder signals, and the Discussion says training for patient 2 was ongoing. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Larzabal, C., Bonnet, S., Costecalde, T., Auboiroux, V., Charvet, G., Chabardes, S., Aksenova, T., & Sauter-Starace, F.
Affiliations
Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives (FR)
Corresponding author
Sauter-Starace, Fabien
Venue
Journal of Neural Engineering
Published
2021-09-09
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
056026
ISSN
  • 1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-2560
OpenAlex
W3194083387
Cited by
37
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1
FWCI
2.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neural Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Fondation Philanthropique Edmond J Safra
  • Fondation Motrice
  • Fondation Nanosciences
  • Fonds de Dotation Clinatec
  • French Ministry of Health (PHRC-15-15-0124)
  • Institut Carnot
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Analog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design
Keywords
tetraplegia, brain-computer interface, quadriplegic patients, signal-to-noise ratio, effective bandwidth, spectral edge frequency, band power, motor imagery, electrode selectivity, spinal cord injury
MeSH terms
Electrocorticography, Brain, Electrodes, Implanted, Electroencephalography, Epidural Space, Humans, Wireless Technology, Brain-Computer Interfaces

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