Cargando…

A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis

Altering the geometry of microelectrodes for use in a cortical neural prosthesis modifies the electric field generated in tissue, thereby affecting electrode efficacy and tissue damage. Commonly, electrodes with an active region located at the tip (“conical” electrodes) are used for stimulation of c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brunton, Emma, Lowery, Arthur J., Rajan, Ramesh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3460534/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23060789
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneng.2012.00023
_version_ 1782244950741614592
author Brunton, Emma
Lowery, Arthur J.
Rajan, Ramesh
author_facet Brunton, Emma
Lowery, Arthur J.
Rajan, Ramesh
author_sort Brunton, Emma
collection PubMed
description Altering the geometry of microelectrodes for use in a cortical neural prosthesis modifies the electric field generated in tissue, thereby affecting electrode efficacy and tissue damage. Commonly, electrodes with an active region located at the tip (“conical” electrodes) are used for stimulation of cortex but there is argument to believe this geometry may not be the best. Here we use finite element analysis to compare the electric fields generated by three types of electrodes, a conical electrode with exposed active tip, an annular electrode with active area located up away from the tip, and a striped annular electrode where the active annular region has bands of insulation interrupting the full active region. The results indicate that the current density on the surface of the conical electrodes can be up to 10 times greater than the current density on the annular electrodes of the same height, which may increase the propensity for tissue damage. However choosing the most efficient electrode geometry in order to reduce power consumption is dependent on the distance of the electrode to the target neurons. If neurons are located within 10 μm of the electrode, then a small conical electrode would be more power efficient. On the other hand if the target neuron is greater than 500 μm away—as happens normally when insertion of an array of electrodes into cortex results in a “kill zone” around each electrode due to insertion damage and inflammatory responses—then a large annular electrode would be more efficient.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3460534
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34605342012-10-11 A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis Brunton, Emma Lowery, Arthur J. Rajan, Ramesh Front Neuroeng Neuroscience Altering the geometry of microelectrodes for use in a cortical neural prosthesis modifies the electric field generated in tissue, thereby affecting electrode efficacy and tissue damage. Commonly, electrodes with an active region located at the tip (“conical” electrodes) are used for stimulation of cortex but there is argument to believe this geometry may not be the best. Here we use finite element analysis to compare the electric fields generated by three types of electrodes, a conical electrode with exposed active tip, an annular electrode with active area located up away from the tip, and a striped annular electrode where the active annular region has bands of insulation interrupting the full active region. The results indicate that the current density on the surface of the conical electrodes can be up to 10 times greater than the current density on the annular electrodes of the same height, which may increase the propensity for tissue damage. However choosing the most efficient electrode geometry in order to reduce power consumption is dependent on the distance of the electrode to the target neurons. If neurons are located within 10 μm of the electrode, then a small conical electrode would be more power efficient. On the other hand if the target neuron is greater than 500 μm away—as happens normally when insertion of an array of electrodes into cortex results in a “kill zone” around each electrode due to insertion damage and inflammatory responses—then a large annular electrode would be more efficient. Frontiers Media S.A. 2012-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3460534/ /pubmed/23060789 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneng.2012.00023 Text en Copyright © 2012 Brunton, Lowery and Rajan. http://www.frontiersin.org/licenseagreement This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and subject to any copyright notices concerning any third-party graphics etc.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Brunton, Emma
Lowery, Arthur J.
Rajan, Ramesh
A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis
title A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis
title_full A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis
title_fullStr A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis
title_short A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis
title_sort comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3460534/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23060789
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneng.2012.00023
work_keys_str_mv AT bruntonemma acomparisonofmicroelectrodesforavisualcorticalprosthesisusingfiniteelementanalysis
AT loweryarthurj acomparisonofmicroelectrodesforavisualcorticalprosthesisusingfiniteelementanalysis
AT rajanramesh acomparisonofmicroelectrodesforavisualcorticalprosthesisusingfiniteelementanalysis
AT bruntonemma comparisonofmicroelectrodesforavisualcorticalprosthesisusingfiniteelementanalysis
AT loweryarthurj comparisonofmicroelectrodesforavisualcorticalprosthesisusingfiniteelementanalysis
AT rajanramesh comparisonofmicroelectrodesforavisualcorticalprosthesisusingfiniteelementanalysis