Cited by 368Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringCellular Mechanics and InteractionsAnalog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design

A finite-element model of the mechanical effects of implantable microelectrodes in the cerebral cortex

Open access
Subbaroyan, Jeyakumar, Martin, David C, Kipke, Daryl R·2005·Journal of Neural Engineering

Abstract

The viability of chronic neural microelectrodes for electrophysiological recording and stimulation depends on several factors, including the encapsulation of the implant by a reactive tissue response. We postulate that mechanical strains induced around the implant site may be one of the leading factors responsible for the sustained tissue response in chronic implants. The objectives of this study were to develop a finite-element model of the probe-brain tissue interface and analyze the effects of tethering forces, probe-tissue adhesion and stiffness of the probe substrate on the interfacial strains induced around the implant site. A 3D finite-element model of the probe-brain tissue microenvironment was developed and used to simulate interfacial strains created by 'micromotion' of chronically implanted microelectrodes. Three candidate substrates were considered: (a) silicon, (b) polyimide and (c) a hypothetical 'soft' material. Simulated tethering forces resulted in elevated strains both at the tip and at the sharp edges of the probe track in the tissue. The strain fields induced by a simulated silicon probe were similar to those induced by a simulated polyimide probe, albeit at higher absolute values for radial tethering forces. Simulations of poor probe-tissue adhesion resulted in elevated strains at the tip and delamination of the tissue from the probe. A tangential tethering force results in 94% reduction in the strain value at the tip of the polyimide probe track in the tissue, whereas the simulated 'soft' probe induced two orders of magnitude smaller values of strain compared to a simulated silicon probe. The model results indicate that softer substrates reduce the strain at the probe-tissue interface and thus may also reduce tissue response in chronic implants.

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 · 10.1088/1741-2560/2/4/006

Cites

46 of 46 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?

  • Computational modeling showed that a polyimide material reduced applied strain to surrounding tissue by 94%, while a theoretical 6 MPa material reduced strain by two orders of magnitude.

    “the polyimide material demonstrated a 94% reduction in applied strain to the surrounding tissue, while strain with the theoretical 6 MPa material was reduced by two orders of magnitude.”

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
Subbaroyan, J., Martin, D. C., & Kipke, D. R.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Venue
Journal of Neural Engineering
Published
2005-10-11
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
103-113
ISSN
  • 1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-2560
OpenAlex
W1982562840
Cited by
368
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 14
FWCI
3.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neural Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (9986866)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Nanotechnology Coordinating Office
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (P41 EB-00 230-10)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Cellular Mechanics and Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Analog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design
Keywords
implantable microelectrodes, cerebral cortex, interfacial strain, silicon probes, tissue encapsulation, electrophysiological recording, neurostimulation
MeSH terms
Animals, Biomechanical Phenomena, Cerebral Cortex, Computer Simulation, Elasticity, Electrodes, Implanted, Humans, Microelectrodes, Models, Neurological, Motion, Physical Stimulation, Stress, Mechanical, Finite Element Analysis, Mechanotransduction, Cellular

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