Cited by 44Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringVagus Nerve Stimulation ResearchMuscle activation and electromyography studies

Biomechanical and functional variation in rat sciatic nerve following cuff electrode implantation

Open access
Restaino, Stephen M, Abliz, Erkinay, Wachrathit, Kelliann, Krauthamer, Victor, Shah, Sameer B·2014·Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nerve cuff electrodes are commonly and successfully used for stimulating peripheral nerves. On the other hand, they occasionally induce functional and morphological changes following chronic implantation, for reasons not always clear. We hypothesize that restriction of nerve mobility due to cuff implantation may alter nerve conduction. METHODS: We quantified acute changes in nerve-muscle electrophysiology, using electromyography, and nerve kinematics in anesthetized Sprague Dawley rat sciatic nerves during controlled hindlimb joint movement. We compared electrophysiological and biomechanical response in uncuffed nerves and those secured within a cuff electrode using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and regression analysis. RESULTS: Tethering resulting from cuff implantation resulted in altered nerve strain and a complex biomechanical environment during joint movement. Coincident with biomechanical changes, electromyography revealed significantly increased variability in the response of conduction latency and amplitude in cuffed, but not free, nerves following joint movement. CONCLUSION: Our findings emphasize the importance of the mechanical interface between peripheral nerves and their devices on neurophysiological performance. This work has implications for nerve device design, implantation, and prediction of long-term efficacy.

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 · 10.1186/1743-0003-11-73

Cites

76 of 76 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?

  • These drawbacks may induce irreversible damage to the nerves and cause serious biological issues, including inflammation, demyelination, axonal degradation, and blood vein compression.

    “These drawbacks may induce irreversible damage to the nerves and cause serious biological issues, including inflammation, demyelination, axonal degradation, and blood vein compression (14–17).”

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
Restaino, S. M., Abliz, E., Wachrathit, K., Krauthamer, V., & Shah, S. B.
Affiliations
  • United States Food and Drug Administration (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Corresponding author
Shah, Sameer B
Venue
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
Published
2014-04-23
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
73-73
ISSN
1743-0003 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2161037068
Cited by
44
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University Libraries (University of Maryland) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Digital Repository at the University of Maryland (University of Maryland College Park)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1042522)
  • U.S. Food and Drug Administration
  • Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems
  • Medical Research and Materiel Command (W81XWH1010773)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vagus Nerve Stimulation Research
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
Keywords
cuff electrodes, sciatic nerve, peripheral nerve stimulation, nerve strain, chronic implantation, rat model
MeSH terms
Animals, Biomechanical Phenomena, Electrodes, Implanted, Electromyography, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Male, Sciatic Nerve, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, 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