Cited by 145Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringMuscle activation and electromyography studiesVagus Nerve Stimulation Research

Fascicular perineurium thickness, size, and position affect model predictions of neural excitation

Open access
Grinberg, Yanina, Schiefer, Matthew A., Tyler, Dustin J., Gustafson, Kenneth J.·2008·IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering

Abstract

The number of applications using neural prosthetic interfaces is expanding. Computer models are a valuable tool to evaluate stimulation techniques and electrode designs. Although our understanding of neural anatomy has improved, its impact on the effects of neural stimulation is not well understood. This study evaluated the effects of fascicle perineurial thickness, diameter, and position on axonal excitation thresholds and population recruitment using finite element models and NEURON simulations. The perineurial thickness of human fascicles was found to be 3.0% +/- 1.0% of the fascicle diameter. Increased perineurial thickness and fascicle diameter increased activation thresholds. The presence of a large neighboring fascicle caused a significant change in activation of a smaller target fascicle by as much as 80% +/- 11% of the total axon population. Smaller fascicles were recruited at lower amplitudes than neighboring larger fascicles. These effects were further illustrated in a realistic model of a human femoral nerve surrounded by a nerve cuff electrode. The data suggest that fascicular selectivity is strongly dependent upon the anatomy of the nerve being stimulated. Therefore, accurate representations of nerve anatomy are required to develop more accurate computer models to evaluate and optimize nerve electrode designs for neural prosthesis applications.

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 · 10.1109/tnsre.2008.2010348

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • Extra-neural interfaces require higher stimulation currents than intra-fascicular interfaces to achieve sensations because electrodes and nerve fibers are separated by the perineurium.

    “Since the electrodes and the nerve fibers are separated by the perineurium, higher stimulation currents are required to achieve sensations than the case of intra-fascicular interfaces (Grinberg et al., 2008).”

    From Selectivity and Longevity of Peripheral-Nerve and Machine Interfaces: A Review. (2017) · cites this paper as Grinberg et al., 2008

    The Discussion (section IV.A; page unavailable) says the perineurium impedes current flow into a fascicle and increases modeled axonal stimulation thresholds. The paper does not compare extra-neural with intra-fascicular interfaces or establish the currents required to produce sensations. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Since the contacts of extra-fascicular electrodes are separated from the nerve fibers by the perineurium, higher stimulation currents are required to achieve sensation than for intra-fascicular electrodes.

    “However, since the contacts are separated from the nerve fibers by the perineurium, higher stimulation currents are required to achieve sensation than for intra-fascicular electrodes (Grinberg et al., 2008).”

    From Biomimetic approaches to bionic touch through a peripheral nerve interface (2015) · cites this paper as Grinberg et al., 2008

    The Discussion (§IV.A; page unavailable) says the perineurium increases modeled axonal stimulation thresholds by reducing the potential gradient inside a fascicle. It does not compare extra-fascicular with intra-fascicular electrodes or report currents required to achieve sensation, so those parts of the claim are unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The size of the perineurium is directly proportional to the size of the fascicle.

    “This is because the size of the perineurium is directly proportional to the size of the fascicle.”
  • This shunting can cause the current from an extraneural source to be directed away from a larger, more resistive fascicle toward a smaller, less resistive fascicle.

    “This shunting can cause the current from an extraneural source to be directed away from a larger, more resistive fascicle toward a smaller, less resistive fascicle [51].”
  • The threshold for activation of a smaller fascicle is generally lower than a larger fascicle.

    “The threshold for activation of a smaller fascicle is generally lower than a larger fascicle [51].”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [27]Gustafson KJ Artis E A comparative analysis of fundamental nerve fascicular anatomy: Physiological limits and implications for nerve cuff electrode design presented at the NIH NINDS Neural Interfaces Workshop Bethesda, MD 2005

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grinberg, Y., Schiefer, M. A., Tyler, D. J., & Gustafson, K. J.
Affiliations
Case Western Reserve University (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering
Published
2008-12
Volume
16
Issue
6
Pages
572-581
ISSN
  • 1534-4320 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-0210
OpenAlex
W2097925212
Cited by
145
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • OhioLink ETD Center (Ohio Library and Information Network) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK 077089, R01DK077089)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (EB-001889, R01EB001889)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vagus Nerve Stimulation Research
Keywords
peripheral nerve stimulation, cuff electrodes, femoral nerve, finite element analysis, neural simulation, nerve anatomy
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Computer Simulation, Differential Threshold, Electric Stimulation, Electrodes, Implanted, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Femoral Nerve, Humans, Models, Neurological, Peripheral Nerves

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