ArticleBiomedical microdevices2024
A self-stiffening compliant intracortical microprobe.
Article in Biomedical microdevices, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Finite element model predicts micromotion-induced strain profiles that correlate with the functional performance of Utah arrays in humans and non-human primates.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Article
- Mechanically-adaptive, resveratrol-eluting neural probes for improved intracortical recording performance and stability.Npj flexible electronics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Utilising a flexible intracortical microprobe to record/stimulate neurons minimises the incompatibility between the implanted microprobe and the brain, reducing tissue damage due to the brain micromotion. Applying bio-dissolvable coating materials temporarily makes a flexible microprobe stiff to tolerate the penetration force during insertion. However, the inability to adjust the dissolving time after the microprobe contact with the cerebrospinal fluid may lead to inaccuracy in the microprobe positioning. Furthermore, since the dissolving process is irreversible, any subsequent positioning error cannot be corrected by re-stiffening the microprobe. The purpose of this study is to propose an intracortical microprobe that incorporates two compressible structures to make the microprobe both adaptive to the brain during operation and stiff during insertion. Applying a compressive force by an inserter compresses the two compressible structures completely, resulting in increasing the equivalent elastic modulus. Thus, instant switching between stiff and soft modes can be accomplished as many times as necessary to ensure high-accuracy positioning while causing minimal tissue damage. The equivalent elastic modulus of the microprobe during operation is ≈ 23 kPa, which is ≈ 42% less than the existing counterpart, resulting in ≈ 46% less maximum strain generated on the surrounding tissue under brain longitudinal motion. The self-stiffening microprobe and surrounding neural tissue are simulated during insertion and operation to confirm the efficiency of the design. Two-photon polymerisation technology is utilised to 3D print the proposed microprobe, which is experimentally validated and inserted into a lamb's brain without buckling.
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.