Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36394042›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022

Clinical viability of magnetic bead implants in muscle.

Cameron R Taylor, William H Clark, Ellen G Clarrissimeaux, Seong Ho Yeon, Matthew J Carty, Stuart R Lipsitz, Roderick T Bronson, Thomas J Roberts, Hugh M Herr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. MRI Safety Considerations for Permanent Magnet Implants in Muscle.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Clinical viability of magnetic bead implants in muscle.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Article
  7. Untethered muscle tracking using magnetomicrometry.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Cameron R TaylorK. Lisa Yang Center for Bionics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States.
William H ClarkDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI, United States.
Ellen G ClarrissimeauxK. Lisa Yang Center for Bionics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States.
Seong Ho YeonK. Lisa Yang Center for Bionics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States.
Matthew J CartyK. Lisa Yang Center for Bionics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States.
Stuart R LipsitzHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Roderick T BronsonHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Thomas J RobertsDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI, United States.
Hugh M HerrK. Lisa Yang Center for Bionics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States.

Funding

Elastic mechanisms in locomotionR01AR055295 · NIAMS · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI EMANUEL AZIZI, Thomas Jay Roberts · 2008 to 2026
$6.0M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR055295
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human movement is accomplished through muscle contraction, yet there does not exist a portable system capable of monitoring muscle length changes in real time. To address this limitation, we previously introduced magnetomicrometry, a minimally-invasive tracking technique comprising two implanted magnetic beads in muscle and a magnetic field sensor array positioned on the body's surface adjacent the implanted beads. The implant system comprises a pair of spherical magnetic beads, each with a first coating of nickel-copper-nickel and an outer coating of Parylene C. In parallel work, we demonstrate submillimeter accuracy of magnetic bead tracking for muscle contractions in an untethered freely-roaming avian model. Here, we address the clinical viability of magnetomicrometry. Using a specialized device to insert magnetic beads into muscle in avian and lagomorph models, we collect data to assess gait metrics, bead migration, and bead biocompatibility. For these animal models, we find no gait differences post-versus pre-implantation, and bead migration towards one another within muscle does not occur for initial bead separation distances greater than 3 cm. Further, using extensive biocompatibility testing, the implants are shown to be non-irritant, non-cytotoxic, non-allergenic, and non-irritating. Our cumulative results lend support for the viability of these magnetic bead implants for implantation in human muscle. We thus anticipate their imminent use in human-machine interfaces, such as in control of prostheses and exoskeletons and in closed-loop neuroprosthetics to aid recovery from neurological disorders.

Indexed as

biocompatibilitybionicshuman-machine interfacesimplantable technologymagnetomicrometrymuscle trackingprosthetic controlwearable technology

Identifiers

PMID36394042
PMCPMC9640959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.