Cargando…

Comparison of the In Vitro and In Vivo Electrochemical Performance of Bionic Electrodes

The electrochemical performance of platinum electrodes was assessed in vitro and in vivo to determine the impact of electrode implantation and the relevance of in vitro testing in predicting in vivo behaviour. A significant change in electrochemical response was seen after electrode polarisation. As...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Harris, Alexander R., Newbold, Carrie, Stathopoulos, Dimitra, Carter, Paul, Cowan, Robert, Wallace, Gordon G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8779563/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35056268
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/mi13010103
_version_ 1784637608305885184
author Harris, Alexander R.
Newbold, Carrie
Stathopoulos, Dimitra
Carter, Paul
Cowan, Robert
Wallace, Gordon G.
author_facet Harris, Alexander R.
Newbold, Carrie
Stathopoulos, Dimitra
Carter, Paul
Cowan, Robert
Wallace, Gordon G.
author_sort Harris, Alexander R.
collection PubMed
description The electrochemical performance of platinum electrodes was assessed in vitro and in vivo to determine the impact of electrode implantation and the relevance of in vitro testing in predicting in vivo behaviour. A significant change in electrochemical response was seen after electrode polarisation. As a result, initial in vitro measurements were poor predictors of subsequent measurements performed in vitro or in vivo. Charge storage capacity and charge density measurements from initial voltammetric measurements were not correlated with subsequent measurements. Electrode implantation also affected the electrochemical impedance. The typically reported impedance at 1 kHz was a very poor predictor of electrode performance. Lower frequencies were significantly more dependent on electrode properties, while higher frequencies were dependent on solution properties. Stronger correlations in impedance at low frequencies were seen between in vitro and in vivo measurements after electrode activation had occurred. Implanting the electrode increased the resistance of the electrochemical circuit, with bone having a higher resistivity than soft tissue. In contrast, protein fouling and fibrous tissue formation had a minimal impact on electrochemical response. In vivo electrochemical measurements also typically use a quasi-reference electrode, may operate in a 2-electrode system, and suffer from uncompensated resistance. The impact of these experimental conditions on electrochemical performance and the relevance of in vitro electrode assessment is discussed. Recommended in vitro testing protocols for assessing bionic electrodes are presented.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8779563
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87795632022-01-22 Comparison of the In Vitro and In Vivo Electrochemical Performance of Bionic Electrodes Harris, Alexander R. Newbold, Carrie Stathopoulos, Dimitra Carter, Paul Cowan, Robert Wallace, Gordon G. Micromachines (Basel) Article The electrochemical performance of platinum electrodes was assessed in vitro and in vivo to determine the impact of electrode implantation and the relevance of in vitro testing in predicting in vivo behaviour. A significant change in electrochemical response was seen after electrode polarisation. As a result, initial in vitro measurements were poor predictors of subsequent measurements performed in vitro or in vivo. Charge storage capacity and charge density measurements from initial voltammetric measurements were not correlated with subsequent measurements. Electrode implantation also affected the electrochemical impedance. The typically reported impedance at 1 kHz was a very poor predictor of electrode performance. Lower frequencies were significantly more dependent on electrode properties, while higher frequencies were dependent on solution properties. Stronger correlations in impedance at low frequencies were seen between in vitro and in vivo measurements after electrode activation had occurred. Implanting the electrode increased the resistance of the electrochemical circuit, with bone having a higher resistivity than soft tissue. In contrast, protein fouling and fibrous tissue formation had a minimal impact on electrochemical response. In vivo electrochemical measurements also typically use a quasi-reference electrode, may operate in a 2-electrode system, and suffer from uncompensated resistance. The impact of these experimental conditions on electrochemical performance and the relevance of in vitro electrode assessment is discussed. Recommended in vitro testing protocols for assessing bionic electrodes are presented. MDPI 2022-01-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8779563/ /pubmed/35056268 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/mi13010103 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Harris, Alexander R.
Newbold, Carrie
Stathopoulos, Dimitra
Carter, Paul
Cowan, Robert
Wallace, Gordon G.
Comparison of the In Vitro and In Vivo Electrochemical Performance of Bionic Electrodes
title Comparison of the In Vitro and In Vivo Electrochemical Performance of Bionic Electrodes
title_full Comparison of the In Vitro and In Vivo Electrochemical Performance of Bionic Electrodes
title_fullStr Comparison of the In Vitro and In Vivo Electrochemical Performance of Bionic Electrodes
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the In Vitro and In Vivo Electrochemical Performance of Bionic Electrodes
title_short Comparison of the In Vitro and In Vivo Electrochemical Performance of Bionic Electrodes
title_sort comparison of the in vitro and in vivo electrochemical performance of bionic electrodes
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8779563/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35056268
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/mi13010103
work_keys_str_mv AT harrisalexanderr comparisonoftheinvitroandinvivoelectrochemicalperformanceofbionicelectrodes
AT newboldcarrie comparisonoftheinvitroandinvivoelectrochemicalperformanceofbionicelectrodes
AT stathopoulosdimitra comparisonoftheinvitroandinvivoelectrochemicalperformanceofbionicelectrodes
AT carterpaul comparisonoftheinvitroandinvivoelectrochemicalperformanceofbionicelectrodes
AT cowanrobert comparisonoftheinvitroandinvivoelectrochemicalperformanceofbionicelectrodes
AT wallacegordong comparisonoftheinvitroandinvivoelectrochemicalperformanceofbionicelectrodes