ArticleScientific reports2020
Development and in vitro validation of flexible intraretinal probes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Highly Controlled Parylene C Coating on Titanium for Invasive Biomedical Applications.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Neural vs Neuromorphic Interfaces: Where Are We Standing?Chemical reviews · 2025Review
- Inkjet-Printed 3D Sensor Arrays with FIB-Induced Electrode Refinement for Low-Noise Amperometric Recordings in hiPSC-Derived Brain Organoids.ACS sensors · 2025Article
- Intraretinal Electrophysiology and Resistivity Profiles of WT and RCS Rat Retina.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Highly Customizable 3D Microelectrode Arrays for In Vitro and In Vivo Neuronal Tissue Recordings.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Toward the Next Generation of Neural Iontronic Interfaces.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Article
- Retinal Prostheses: Engineering and Clinical Perspectives for Vision Restoration.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- In the Eye of the Storm: Bi-Directional Electrophysiological Investigation of the Intact Retina.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The efforts to improve the treatment efficacy in blind patients with retinal degenerative diseases would greatly benefit from retinal activity feedback, which is lacking in current retinal implants. While the door for a bidirectional communication device that stimulates and records intraretinally has been opened by the recent use of silicon-based penetrating probes, the biological impact induced by the insertion of such rigid devices is still unknown. Here, we developed for the first time, flexible intraretinal probes and validated in vitro the acute biological insertion impact in mouse retinae compared to standard silicon-based probes. Our results show that probes based on flexible materials, such as polyimide and parylene-C, in combination with a narrow shank design 50 µm wide and 7 µm thick, and the use of insertion speeds as high as 187.5 µm/s will successfully penetrate the retina, reduce the footprint of the insertion to roughly 2 times the cross-section of the probe, and induce low dead cell counts, while keeping the vitality of the tissue and recording the neural activity at different depths.
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.