ReviewAnatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007)2012
Acute damage threshold for infrared neural stimulation of the cochlea: functional and histological evaluation.
Review in Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.
- Distinguishing Photoacoustic and Photothermal Neuron Stimulation Through Quantitative Mapping Spatiotemporal Field Evolution.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- How spatial temperature gradients modulate infrared stimulation of the ex vivo rat sciatic nerve.Biophysical journal · 2025Article
- Brainwide mesoscale functional networks revealed by focal infrared neural stimulation of the amygdala.National science review · 2025Article
- Study on Recovery Strategy of Hearing Loss & SGN Regeneration Under Physical Regulation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Selective activation of mesoscale functional circuits via multichannel infrared stimulation of cortical columns in ultra-high-field 7T MRI.Cell reports methods · 2025Article
- Article
- Modulation of neuronal dynamics by sustained and activity-dependent continuous-wave near-infrared laser stimulation.Neurophotonics · 2024Article
- Characterization and closed-loop control of infrared thalamocortical stimulation produces spatially constrained single-unit responses.PNAS nexus · 2024Article
- Nanoparticle-based optical interfaces for retinal neuromodulation: a review.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2024Review
- Spatially specific, closed-loop infrared thalamocortical deep brain stimulation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Emerging trends in the development of flexible optrode arrays for electrophysiology.APL bioengineering · 2023Review
- Histological and electrophysiological evidence on the safe operation of a sharp-tip multimodal optrode during infrared neuromodulation of the rat cortex.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Infrared neural stimulation at different wavelengths and pulse shapes.Progress in biophysics and molecular biology · 2021Article
- Two-photon GCaMP6f imaging of infrared neural stimulation evoked calcium signals in mouse cortical neurons in vivo.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Near-infrared stimulation of the auditory nerve: A decade of progress toward an optical cochlear implant.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2021Review
- Identifying optimal parameters for infrared neural stimulation in the peripheral nervous system.Neurophotonics · 2021Article
- Optical stimulation of neural tissue.Healthcare technology letters · 2020Article
- Thermal damage threshold of neurons during infrared stimulation.Biomedical optics express · 2020Article
- First biocompatibility margins for optical stimulation at the eardrum via 532-nm laser pulses in a mouse model.Journal of biomedical optics · 2019Article
- Multichannel optrodes for photonic stimulation.Neurophotonics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This article provides a mini review of the current state of infrared neural stimulation (INS), and new experimental results concerning INS damage thresholds. INS promises to be an attractive alternative for neural interfaces. With this method, one can attain spatially selective neural stimulation that is not possible with electrical stimulation. INS is based on the delivery of short laser pulses that result in a transient temperature increase in the tissue and depolarize the neurons. At a high stimulation rate and/or high pulse energy, the method bears the risk of thermal damage to the tissue from the instantaneous temperature increase or from potential accumulation of thermal energy. With the present study, we determined the injury thresholds in guinea pig cochleae for acute INS using functional measurements (compound action potentials) and histological evaluation. The selected laser parameters for INS were the wavelength (λ = 1,869 nm), the pulse duration (100 μs), the pulse repetition rate (250 Hz), and the radiant energy (0-127 μJ/pulse). For up to 5 hr of continuous irradiation at 250 Hz and at radiant energies up to 25 μJ/pulse, we did not observe any functional or histological damage in the cochlea. Functional loss was observed for energies above 25 μJ/pulse and the probability of injury to the target tissue resulting in functional loss increased with increasing radiant energy. Corresponding cochlear histology from control animals and animals exposed to 98 or 127 μJ/pulse at 250 Hz pulse repetition rate did not show a loss of spiral ganglion cells, hair cells, or other soft tissue structures of the organ of Corti. Light microscopy did not reveal any structural changes in the soft tissue either. Additionally, microcomputed tomography was used to visualize the placement of the optical fiber within the cochlea.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.