Cited by 600Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesAnalog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design

Failure mode analysis of silicon-based intracortical microelectrode arrays in non-human primates

Open access
Barrese, James C, Rao, Naveen, Paroo, Kaivon, Triebwasser, Corey, Vargas-Irwin, Carlos, Franquemont, Lachlan, Donoghue, John P·2013·Journal of Neural Engineering

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) using chronically implanted intracortical microelectrode arrays (MEAs) have the potential to restore lost function to people with disabilities if they work reliably for years. Current sensors fail to provide reliably useful signals over extended periods of time for reasons that are not clear. This study reports a comprehensive retrospective analysis from a large set of implants of a single type of intracortical MEA in a single species, with a common set of measures in order to evaluate failure modes. APPROACH: Since 1996, 78 silicon MEAs were implanted in 27 monkeys (Macaca mulatta). We used two approaches to find reasons for sensor failure. First, we classified the time course leading up to complete recording failure as acute (abrupt) or chronic (progressive). Second, we evaluated the quality of electrode recordings over time based on signal features and electrode impedance. Failure modes were divided into four categories: biological, material, mechanical, and unknown. MAIN RESULTS: Recording duration ranged from 0 to 2104 days (5.75 years), with a mean of 387 days and a median of 182 days (n = 78). Sixty-two arrays failed completely with a mean time to failure of 332 days (median = 133 days) while nine array experiments were electively terminated for experimental reasons (mean = 486 days). Seven remained active at the close of this study (mean = 753 days). Most failures (56%) occurred within a year of implantation, with acute mechanical failures the most common class (48%), largely because of connector issues (83%). Among grossly observable biological failures (24%), a progressive meningeal reaction that separated the array from the parenchyma was most prevalent (14.5%). In the absence of acute interruptions, electrode recordings showed a slow progressive decline in spike amplitude, noise amplitude, and number of viable channels that predicts complete signal loss by about eight years. Impedance measurements showed systematic early increases, which did not appear to affect recording quality, followed by a slow decline over years. The combination of slowly falling impedance and signal quality in these arrays indicates that insulating material failure is the most significant factor. SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first long-term failure mode analysis of an emerging BCI technology in a large series of non-human primates. The classification system introduced here may be used to standardize how neuroprosthetic failure modes are evaluated. The results demonstrate the potential for these arrays to record for many years, but achieving reliable sensors will require replacing connectors with implantable wireless systems, controlling the meningeal reaction, and improving insulation materials. These results will focus future research in order to create clinical neuroprosthetic sensors, as well as valuable research tools, that are able to safely provide reliable neural signals for over a decade.

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 · 10.1088/1741-2560/10/6/066014

Cites

42 of 42 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?

  • 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 [100]

  • Most penetrating microelectrode arrays currently have maximum in vivo lifetimes of several months or a few years.

    “In spite of the formidable results of using UEA/USEA technologies described above, most penetrating microelectrode arrays currently have maximum in vivo lifetimes of several months or a few years (Suner et al 2005, Prasad et al 2012, Barrese et al 2013).”

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
Barrese, J. C., Rao, N., Paroo, K., Triebwasser, C., Vargas-Irwin, C., Franquemont, L., & Donoghue, J. P.
Affiliations
Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Barrese, James C
  • Rao, Naveen
  • Paroo, Kaivon
  • Triebwasser, Corey
  • Vargas-Irwin, Carlos
  • Franquemont, Lachlan
  • Donoghue, John P
Venue
Journal of Neural Engineering
Published
2013-11-12
Volume
10
Issue
6
Pages
066014
ISSN
  • 1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-2560
OpenAlex
W1999169980
Cited by
600
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 67 · 2017: 47 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
14.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neural Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS025074)
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
intracortical microelectrode arrays, failure mode analysis, brain-computer interface, chronic implantation, non-human primates, rhesus monkeys, silicon microelectrodes, electrode impedance, meningeal reaction, connector failure, neuroprosthetics, chronic neural recording, recording duration
MeSH terms
Animals, Cerebral Cortex, Electrodes, Implanted, Female, Macaca mulatta, Male, Microelectrodes, Silicon, Equipment Failure Analysis

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