用有限元分析比较视觉皮质假体的微电极。

Frontiers in neuroengineering Pub Date : 2012-09-28 eCollection Date: 2012-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fneng.2012.00023
Emma Brunton, Arthur J Lowery, Ramesh Rajan
{"title":"用有限元分析比较视觉皮质假体的微电极。","authors":"Emma Brunton,&nbsp;Arthur J Lowery,&nbsp;Ramesh Rajan","doi":"10.3389/fneng.2012.00023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Altering the geometry of microelectrodes for use in a cortical neural prosthesis modifies the electric field generated in tissue, thereby affecting electrode efficacy and tissue damage. Commonly, electrodes with an active region located at the tip (\"conical\" electrodes) are used for stimulation of cortex but there is argument to believe this geometry may not be the best. Here we use finite element analysis to compare the electric fields generated by three types of electrodes, a conical electrode with exposed active tip, an annular electrode with active area located up away from the tip, and a striped annular electrode where the active annular region has bands of insulation interrupting the full active region. The results indicate that the current density on the surface of the conical electrodes can be up to 10 times greater than the current density on the annular electrodes of the same height, which may increase the propensity for tissue damage. However choosing the most efficient electrode geometry in order to reduce power consumption is dependent on the distance of the electrode to the target neurons. If neurons are located within 10 μm of the electrode, then a small conical electrode would be more power efficient. On the other hand if the target neuron is greater than 500 μm away-as happens normally when insertion of an array of electrodes into cortex results in a \"kill zone\" around each electrode due to insertion damage and inflammatory responses-then a large annular electrode would be more efficient.</p>","PeriodicalId":73093,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in neuroengineering","volume":"5 ","pages":"23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3389/fneng.2012.00023","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Emma Brunton,&nbsp;Arthur J Lowery,&nbsp;Ramesh Rajan\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fneng.2012.00023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Altering the geometry of microelectrodes for use in a cortical neural prosthesis modifies the electric field generated in tissue, thereby affecting electrode efficacy and tissue damage. Commonly, electrodes with an active region located at the tip (\\\"conical\\\" electrodes) are used for stimulation of cortex but there is argument to believe this geometry may not be the best. Here we use finite element analysis to compare the electric fields generated by three types of electrodes, a conical electrode with exposed active tip, an annular electrode with active area located up away from the tip, and a striped annular electrode where the active annular region has bands of insulation interrupting the full active region. The results indicate that the current density on the surface of the conical electrodes can be up to 10 times greater than the current density on the annular electrodes of the same height, which may increase the propensity for tissue damage. However choosing the most efficient electrode geometry in order to reduce power consumption is dependent on the distance of the electrode to the target neurons. If neurons are located within 10 μm of the electrode, then a small conical electrode would be more power efficient. On the other hand if the target neuron is greater than 500 μm away-as happens normally when insertion of an array of electrodes into cortex results in a \\\"kill zone\\\" around each electrode due to insertion damage and inflammatory responses-then a large annular electrode would be more efficient.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in neuroengineering\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3389/fneng.2012.00023\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in neuroengineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fneng.2012.00023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2012/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in neuroengineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fneng.2012.00023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

改变用于皮质神经假体的微电极的几何形状可以改变组织中产生的电场,从而影响电极的功效和组织损伤。通常,电极的活动区域位于尖端(“锥形”电极)被用于刺激皮层,但有争论认为这种几何形状可能不是最好的。在这里,我们使用有限元分析来比较三种类型电极产生的电场,一种是具有暴露的有源尖端的锥形电极,一种是有源区域位于远离尖端的环形电极,一种是条纹环形电极,其中有源环形区域具有绝缘带,中断了完整的有源区域。结果表明,锥形电极表面的电流密度可达相同高度的环形电极表面电流密度的10倍,这可能会增加组织损伤的倾向。然而,选择最有效的电极几何形状以降低功耗取决于电极到目标神经元的距离。如果神经元位于电极的10 μm范围内,那么一个小的锥形电极将更节能。另一方面,如果目标神经元的距离大于500 μm——当电极阵列插入大脑皮层时,由于插入损伤和炎症反应,每个电极周围都会形成一个“杀伤区”,这种情况通常会发生——那么一个大的环形电极会更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A comparison of microelectrodes for a visual cortical prosthesis using finite element analysis.

Altering the geometry of microelectrodes for use in a cortical neural prosthesis modifies the electric field generated in tissue, thereby affecting electrode efficacy and tissue damage. Commonly, electrodes with an active region located at the tip ("conical" electrodes) are used for stimulation of cortex but there is argument to believe this geometry may not be the best. Here we use finite element analysis to compare the electric fields generated by three types of electrodes, a conical electrode with exposed active tip, an annular electrode with active area located up away from the tip, and a striped annular electrode where the active annular region has bands of insulation interrupting the full active region. The results indicate that the current density on the surface of the conical electrodes can be up to 10 times greater than the current density on the annular electrodes of the same height, which may increase the propensity for tissue damage. However choosing the most efficient electrode geometry in order to reduce power consumption is dependent on the distance of the electrode to the target neurons. If neurons are located within 10 μm of the electrode, then a small conical electrode would be more power efficient. On the other hand if the target neuron is greater than 500 μm away-as happens normally when insertion of an array of electrodes into cortex results in a "kill zone" around each electrode due to insertion damage and inflammatory responses-then a large annular electrode would be more efficient.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
In vivo comparison of the charge densities required to evoke motor responses using novel annular penetrating microelectrodes. SET: a pupil detection method using sinusoidal approximation. The chronic challenge-new vistas on long-term multisite contacts to the central nervous system. High frequency switched-mode stimulation can evoke post synaptic responses in cerebellar principal neurons. NeuroPG: open source software for optical pattern generation and data acquisition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1