Mechanically-compliant intracortical implants reduce the neuroinflammatory response
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: The mechanisms underlying intracortical microelectrode encapsulation and failure are not well understood. A leading hypothesis implicates the role of the mechanical mismatch between rigid implant materials and the much softer brain tissue. Previous work has established the benefits of compliant materials on reducing early neuroinflammatory events. However, recent studies established late onset of a disease-like neurodegenerative state. APPROACH: In this study, we implanted mechanically-adaptive materials, which are initially rigid but become compliant after implantation, to investigate the long-term chronic neuroinflammatory response to compliant intracortical microelectrodes. MAIN RESULTS: Three days after implantation, during the acute healing phase of the response, the tissue response to the compliant implants was statistically similar to that of chemically matched stiff implants with much higher rigidity. However, at two, eight, and sixteen weeks post-implantation in the rat cortex, the compliant implants demonstrated a significantly reduced neuroinflammatory response when compared to stiff reference materials. Chronically implanted compliant materials also exhibited a more stable blood-brain barrier than the stiff reference materials. SIGNIFICANCE: Overall, the data show strikingly that mechanically-compliant intracortical implants can reduce the neuroinflammatory response in comparison to stiffer systems.
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?
In neuroprostheses implanted in nervous tissue, implants implementing flexible or stretchable materials can achieve a much lower degree of FBR and tissue damage when chronically implanted.
“Particularly in neuroprostheses implanted in nervous tissue—some of the softest tissue in the body—implants implementing flexible or stretchable materials can achieve a much lower degree of FBR and tissue damage when chronically implanted (Nguyen et al., 2014; Minev et al., 2015; Lacour et al., 2016; Capogrosso et al., 2018).”
From Foreign Body Reaction to Implanted Biomaterials and Its Impact in Nerve Neuroprosthetics (2021) · cites this paper as Nguyen et al., 2014
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 75 · Cited by 274
- Authors
- Nguyen, J. K., Park, D. J., Skousen, J. L., Hess-Dunning, A. E., Tyler, D. J., Rowan, S. J., Weder, C., & Capadona, J. R.
- Affiliations
- Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center (US)
- Case Western Reserve University (US)
- University of Fribourg (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Capadona, Jeffrey R
- Venue
- Journal of Neural Engineering
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2014-08-15
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 056014
- ISSN
- 1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-2560
- PMC
- PMC4175058
- OpenAlex
- W2084506653
- Cited by
- 274
- References
- 75
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 10.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Neural Engineering (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0828155, 1204948, 0804874)
- U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (B6344W, B7122-R, C3819C)
- Case Western Reserve University
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (126046)
- National Institutes of Health (5r21ns053798-02, R21-NS053798)
- Rehabilitation Research and Development Service
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS082404, R21-NS053798, R01-NS082404-01A1)
- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (T32EB004314)
- Division of Materials Research (1204948, DMR-1204948)
- Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Polymers and Plastics › Conducting polymers and applications
- Keywords
- intracortical microelectrodes, neuroinflammation, mechanical mismatch, blood-brain barrier, chronic implantation, neurodegeneration, rat cortex, implant encapsulation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Elasticity, Electrodes, Implanted, Encephalitis, Male, Materials Testing, Microelectrodes, Prosthesis Design, Computer-Aided Design, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Equipment Failure Analysis, Coated Materials, Biocompatible, Rats
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