A mm-sized free-floating wirelessly powered implantable optical stimulating system-on-a-chip

Jia, Yaoyao; Mirbozorgi, S. Abdollah; Lee, Byunghun; Khan, Wasif; Madi, Fatma; Weber, Arthur J.; Li, Wen; Ghovanloo, Maysam

doi:10.1109/isscc.2018.8310387

Cited by 38 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, there is always a compromise between the size/weight of the battery and uninterrupted duration of experiments. Currently, we are developing the next generation headstage, which can be inductively powered in the EnerCage-HC2 system [36,49,50], to support experiments with unlimited duration on both rats and mice. The new headstage will use an ASIC, which is more costly to develop than the current version that only uses COTS components.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wireless opto-electro neural interface for experiments with small freely behaving animals

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wireless opto-electro neural interface for experiments with small freely behaving animals

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fig. 27 gives the diagram of the experimental setup Neuron 17 [11] ISSCC 18 [13] TBioCAS 18 [14] TBioCAS 19 [15] Nat. Biomed.…”

Section: Hydra Stimulation Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

MagNI: A Magnetoelectrically Powered and Controlled Wireless Neurostimulating Implant

Chen

Alrashdan

et al. 2020

IEEE Trans. Biomed. Circuits Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the first wireless and programmable neural stimulator leveraging magnetoelectric (ME) effects for power and data transfer. Thanks to low tissue absorption, low misalignment sensitivity and high power transfer efficiency, the ME effect enables safe delivery of high power levels (a few milliwatts) at low resonant frequencies (∼250 kHz) to mm-sized implants deep inside the body (30-mm depth). The presented MagNI (Magnetoelectric Neural Implant) consists of a 1.5-mm 2 180-nm CMOS chip, an in-house built 4 × 2 mm ME film, an energy storage capacitor, and on-board electrodes on a flexible polyimide substrate with a total volume of 8.2 mm 3 . The chip with a power consumption of 23.7 µW includes robust system control and data recovery mechanisms under source amplitude variations (1-V variation tolerance). The system delivers fully-programmable bi-phasic current-controlled stimulation with patterns covering 0.05-to-1.5-mA amplitude, 64to-512-µs pulse width and 0-to-200-Hz repetition frequency for neurostimulation.

show abstract

“…An alternative approach to the use of waveguide-based systems is the application of LEDs. These have been successfully utilized in basic optogenetic research either as LED chips with lateral dimensions in the range of several 100 μm and thicknesses above 50 μm [12,60,65,165], or as μLEDs with a thickness of ca. 5 μm and custom-designed dimensions as small as 5×5 μm 2 [11,43,67,69,117,124,157].…”

Section: Succesfull Examples For Oaimdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards the clinical translation of optogenetic skeletal muscle stimulation

Gundelach

Hüser

Beutner

et al. 2020

Pflugers Arch - Eur J Physiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paralysis is a frequent phenomenon in many diseases, and to date, only functional electrical stimulation (FES) mediated via the innervating nerve can be employed to restore skeletal muscle function in patients. Despite recent progress, FES has several technical limitations and significant side effects. Optogenetic stimulation has been proposed as an alternative, as it may circumvent some of the disadvantages of FES enabling cell type–specific, spatially and temporally precise stimulation of cells expressing light-gated ion channels, commonly Channelrhodopsin2. Two distinct approaches for the restoration of skeletal muscle function with optogenetics have been demonstrated: indirect optogenetic stimulation through the innervating nerve similar to FES and direct optogenetic stimulation of the skeletal muscle. Although both approaches show great promise, both have their limitations and there are several general hurdles that need to be overcome for their translation into clinics. These include successful gene transfer, sustained optogenetic protein expression, and the creation of optically active implantable devices. Herein, a comprehensive summary of the underlying mechanisms of electrical and optogenetic approaches is provided. With this knowledge in mind, we substantiate a detailed discussion of the advantages and limitations of each method. Furthermore, the obstacles in the way of clinical translation of optogenetic stimulation are discussed, and suggestions on how they could be overcome are provided. Finally, four specific examples of pathologies demanding novel therapeutic measures are discussed with a focus on the likelihood of direct versus indirect optogenetic stimulation.

show abstract

A mm-sized free-floating wirelessly powered implantable optical stimulating system-on-a-chip

Cited by 38 publications

References 5 publications

Wireless opto-electro neural interface for experiments with small freely behaving animals

Wireless opto-electro neural interface for experiments with small freely behaving animals

MagNI: A Magnetoelectrically Powered and Controlled Wireless Neurostimulating Implant

Towards the clinical translation of optogenetic skeletal muscle stimulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About