Abstract
Micro-machined neural prosthetic devices can be designed and fabricated to permit recording and stimulation of specific sites in the nervous system. Unfortunately, the long-term use of these devices is compromised by cellular encapsulation. The goals of this study were to determine if device size, surface characteristics, or insertion method affected this response. Devices with two general designs were used. One group had chisel-shaped tips, sharp angular corners, and surface irregularities on the micrometer size scale. The second group had rounded corners, and smooth surfaces. Devices of the first group were inserted using a microprocessor-controlled inserter. Devices of the second group were inserted by hand. Comparisons were made of responses to the larger devices in the first group with devices from the second group. Responses were assessed 1 day and 1, 2, 4, 6, and 12 weeks after insertions. Tissues were immunochemically labeled for glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) or vimentin to identify astrocytes, or for ED1 to identify microglia. For the second comparison devices from the first group with different cross-sectional areas were analyzed. Similar reactive responses were observed following insertion of all devices; however, the volume of tissue involved at early times, <1 week, was proportional to the cross-sectional area of the devices. Responses observed after 4 weeks were similar for all devices. Thus, the continued presence of devices promotes formation of a sheath composed partly of reactive astrocytes and microglia. Both GFAP-positive and -negative cells were adherent to all devices. These data indicate that device insertion promotes two responses - an early response that is proportional to device size and a sustained response that is independent of device size, geometry, and surface roughness. The early response may be associated with the amount of damage generated during insertion. The sustained response is more likely due to tissue-device interactions.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 23-35 |
Number of pages | 13 |
Journal | Brain Research |
Volume | 983 |
Issue number | 1-2 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Sep 5 2003 |
Externally published | Yes |
Funding
This work was partially supported by NIH, NCRR RR10957, and NS9-RO1-NS40977 and the Cornell Nanofabrication Facility, a node of the National Nanofabrication Users Network supported by the NSF. The authors thank the Center for Neural Communication Technology sponsored by NIH, NCRR grant P41-RR09754 for devices. The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of Mr. Alan Hershenroder and Mr. William Abbt of the Wadsworth Center’s Automation and Instrumentation department who designed and fabricated the device insertion device and Mr. J. Dilgen for help with manuscript preparation.
Funders | Funder number |
---|---|
Center for Neural Communication Technology | P41-RR09754 |
National Science Foundation | |
National Institutes of Health | |
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke | R01NS040977 |
National Center for Research Resources | RR10957 |
Keywords
- Brain response
- Cellular encapsulation
- Micro-machined silicon device
- Tissue-device interaction