Cited by 11Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques

Polyimide Electrode-Based Electrical Stimulation Impedes Early Stage Muscle Graft Regeneration

Open access
Srinivasan, Shriya, Vyas, Keval, McAvoy, Malia, Calvaresi, Peter, Khan, Omar F., Langer, Robert, Anderson, Daniel G., Herr, Hugh·2019·Frontiers in Neurology

Abstract

Given the increasing use of regenerative free muscle flaps for various reconstructive procedures and neuroprosthetic applications, there is great interest and value in their enhanced regeneration, revascularization, and reinnervation for improved functional recovery. Here, we implant polyimide-based mircroelectrodes on free flap grafts and perform electrical stimulation for 6 weeks in a murine model. Using electrophysiological and histological assessments, we compare outcomes of stimulated grafts with unstimulated control grafts. We find delayed reinnervation and abnormal electromyographic (EMG) signals, with significantly more polyphasia, lower compound muscle action potentials and higher fatigability in stimulated animals. These metrics are suggestive of myopathy in the free flap grafts stimulated with the electrode. Additionally, active inflammatory processes and partial necrosis are observed in grafts stimulated with the implanted electrode. The results suggest that under this treatment protocol, implanted epimysial electrodes and electrical stimulation to deinnervated, and devascularized flaps during the early recovery phase may be detrimental to regeneration. Future work should determine the optimal implantation and stimulation window for accelerating free muscle graft regeneration.

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 · 10.3389/fneur.2019.00252

Cites

51 of 52 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?

  • Muscle electrodes should be implanted 1-2 weeks after surgery to allow time for early regeneration with adequate angiogenesis and to enable biocompatible interfacing.

    “This study concludes that the muscle electrodes should be implanted 1-2 weeks after surgery to have time for early regeneration with adequate angiogenesis, and to enable biocompatible interfacing.”

    From Interfaces with the peripheral nervous system for the control of a neuroprosthetic limb: a review (2020) · cites this paper as [44]

    The Discussion (‘Delayed Reinnervation and Partial Myopathy’; page not provided) says that, for devascularized free muscle grafts, implanting devices 1–2 weeks after surgery may allow capillary ingrowth, and that stimulation should wait until basic vasculature has formed. The claim turns this conditional suggestion into a general recommendation for muscle electrodes; the passage does not say that delayed implantation will enable biocompatible interfacing. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Srinivasan, S., Vyas, K., McAvoy, M., Calvaresi, P., Khan, O. F., Langer, R., Anderson, D. G., & Herr, H.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research At MIT (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Srinivasan, Shriya
Venue
Frontiers in Neurology
Published
2019-03-22
Volume
10
Pages
252-252
ISSN
1664-2295 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2923957014
Cited by
11
References
51
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Neurology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Defense (P30-CA14051)
  • Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (P30-CA14051, Grant P30-CA14051)
  • National Cancer Institute (CA14051, Koch Institute Support (core) Grant P30-CA14051, Grant P30-CA14051, P30CA014051, P30-CA-14051)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Keywords
electrical stimulation, free muscle flap, reinnervation, revascularization, myopathy, electromyography, graft inflammation, necrosis, neuroprosthetics, reconstructive surgery

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