Cited by 49Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringUndergraduate Neuroscience Education and ResearchNeurological disorders and treatments

Utah array characterization and histological analysis of a multi-year implant in non-human primate motor and sensory cortices

Open access
Patel, Paras R, Welle, Elissa J, Letner, Joseph G, Shen, Hao, Bullard, Autumn J, Caldwell, Ciara M, Vega-Medina, Alexis, Richie, Julianna M +4 more·2023·Journal of Neural Engineering

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Objective. The Utah array is widely used in both clinical studies and neuroscience. It has a strong track record of safety. However, it is also known that implanted electrodes promote the formation of scar tissue in the immediate vicinity of the electrodes, which may negatively impact the ability to record neural waveforms. This scarring response has been primarily studied in rodents, which may have a very different response than primate brain. Approach. Here, we present a rare nonhuman primate histological dataset ( n = 1 rhesus macaque) obtained 848 and 590 d after implantation in two brain hemispheres. For 2 of 4 arrays that remained within the cortex, NeuN was used to stain for neuron somata at three different depths along the shanks. Images were filtered and denoised, with neurons then counted in the vicinity of the arrays as well as a nearby section of control tissue. Additionally, 3 of 4 arrays were imaged with a scanning electrode microscope to evaluate any materials damage that might be present. Main results. Overall, we found a 63% percent reduction in the number of neurons surrounding the electrode shanks compared to control areas. In terms of materials, the arrays remained largely intact with metal and Parylene C present, though tip breakage and cracks were observed on many electrodes. Significance. Overall, these results suggest that the tissue response in the nonhuman primate brain shows similar neuron loss to previous studies using rodents. Electrode improvements, for example using smaller or softer probes, may therefore substantially improve the tissue response and potentially improve the neuronal recording yield in primate cortex.

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/acab86

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.

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?

  • Previous demonstrations of intracortical insertion of MEAs showed injury and neuronal loss at the implantation location, as well as signal instabilities contributing to signal loss and performance decline over time.

    “Previous demonstrations of intracortical insertion of MEAs showed injury and neuronal loss at the implantation location99, as well as signal instabilities contributing to signal loss and performance decline over time100,101.”

    From The speech neuroprosthesis (2024) · cites this paper as [99]

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 62 · Cited by 49

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [41]Xie X, Rieth L, Cardwell R, Sharma R, Yoo JM, Diweka M, Tathireddy P and Solzbacher F 2013 Bi-layer encapsulation of utah array based nerual interfaces by atomic layer deposited Al2O3 and parylene C 2013 Transducers Eurosensors XXVII 17th Int. Conf. Solid-State Sensors, Actuators Microsystems, TRANSDUCERS EUROSENSORS 2013 1267– 70

Authors
Patel, P. R., Welle, E. J., Letner, J. G., Shen, H., Bullard, A. J., Caldwell, C. M., Vega-Medina, A., Richie, J. M., Thayer, H. E., Patil, P. G., Cai, D., & Chestek, C. A.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
  • Patel, Paras R
  • Welle, Elissa J
  • Letner, Joseph G
  • Shen, Hao
  • Bullard, Autumn J
  • Caldwell, Ciara M
  • Vega-Medina, Alexis
  • Richie, Julianna M
  • Thayer, Hope E
  • Patil, Parag G
  • Cai, Dawen
  • Chestek, Cynthia A
Venue
Journal of Neural Engineering
Published
2023-01-18
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
014001
ISSN
  • 1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-2560
OpenAlex
W4311447024
Cited by
49
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 6
FWCI
3.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neural Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM111293)
  • National Science Foundation (1707316)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (UF1NS107659)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Undergraduate Neuroscience Education and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
Keywords
Utah array, neural implants, rhesus monkeys, non-human primate brain, neuronal loss, long-term implantation, Parylene C, motor cortex, sensory cortex
MeSH terms
Animals, Cerebral Cortex, Electrodes, Implanted, Macaca mulatta, Microelectrodes, Neurons, Utah

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