ArticleBiomaterials2026
A comparative study assessing neural recording quality and inflammatory tissue response between stiff and flexible microelectrode arrays.
Article in Biomaterials, 2026. 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.
- Molecular Mechanisms of Foreign Body Responses to Neural Electrodes and Surface Biofunctionalization Strategies for Interface Modulation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Mechanics of Long-Shank 5 mm Neural Probe Insertion into the Rat Brain: Effects of Geometry and Vibration-Assisted Insertion.Micromachines · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Implantable microelectrode arrays (MEAs) are powerful tools for neurophysiological studies and hold tremendous potential as a key component of clinical neuroprostheses. However, their long-term efficacy is hampered by inflammatory responses to implantation. This study examines the impact of MEA substrate rigidity on neural recording quality and inflammatory tissue responses. We implanted stiff silicon-based and flexible polyimide-based MEAs with similar geometries in the deep brain region of the mouse striatum and performed weekly impedance and electrophysiological measurements over 4 weeks. The flexible MEAs demonstrated more reliable recording quality in terms of stable signal-to-noise ratio, single-unit yield, peak-to-peak amplitude, noise, and impedance, compared to the stiff probes, whose performance deteriorated over time. Endpoint histological analyses were performed to assess the glial scarring (Iba-1, GFAP), blood-brain barrier integrity (IgG), mechanosensitive ion channel expression (Piezo1), and neuronal population (NeuN and NF200) around the implant site. We found reduced microglial activation and IgG fouling within a 50-μm radius around the flexible MEAs compared to the stiff group. Additionally, a higher expression of Piezo1 was observed localized around the stiff MEA, correlating positively with increased Iba-1 and GFAP intensity. Our results show that flexible MEAs have improved device-tissue integration, indicated by lower inflammation levels and better recording stability. This research underscores the critical role of MEA substrate rigidity in influencing adverse tissue reactions, especially for deep brain regions. This understanding will improve our ability to design stable and reliable devices for chronic neural interface devices and beyond.
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.