Carbohydrate based biomaterials for neural interface applications

Abstract

Due to their specific bioactivities and hydrophilic properties, carbohydrates offer potential solutions for addressing some of the limitations of the existing biomolecular approaches for neural interfacing applications.

Flexible IrOx neural electrode for mouse vagus nerve stimulation

“…Conducting polymers are another very promising electrode material with low impedance (approximately half the value of the uncoated metallic control samples), high CSC (~75 mC/cm 2 ), positive biocompatibility outcomes and high chemical stability, and have been widely reported for neural signal recording [ 64 , 65 ]. A variety of methods such as electrografting P(EDOT-NH2) are being evaluated as adhesion-promoting layer, which is proposed to form the covalent bonds between organic species and metal or metal oxide substrates [ 66 ].…”

Streamlining the interface between electronics and neural systems for bidirectional electrochemical communication

“…Comprehensive reviews have covered the host of materials for cellular adhesion and neural interfacing. [24][25][26] Recent developments in surface modication for cellular adhesion are geared towards enhancing the long-term stability of modied surfaces and prevention of a foreign body reaction.…”

Conducting polymer‐based nanostructured materials for brain–machine interfaces

“…Indeed, the intrinsic difference between soft, high water‐containing brain tissues (1–100 kPa) and stiff, brittle and dry synthetic devices (with mechanical characteristics in the order of GPa) can result in injuries and poor coupling and integration at the implantation site (Llerena Zambrano et al, 2021; Shur et al, 2020). This may introduce chronic inflammation reactions and interfacing issues, resulting in an increase in impedance—due to the formation of astrocytic scars and microglia populations—and a decrease in detection and stimulation efficiency—because of delamination phenomena (Figure 1c; Dhawan & Cui, 2022; X. Wu & Peng, 2019). The ideal material for BMI applications should observe three main requirements: (i) it should be highly biocompatible to minimize the immunological and inflammatory response; (ii) it should be compatible at physical and chemical levels in order not to induce any damage or injury to the brain tissue; and (iii) it should have high electric conductive characteristics for improving the acquisition of signals (Khan et al, 2021; Shur et al, 2020).…”

“…Indeed, the intrinsic difference between soft, high water-containing brain tissues (1-100 kPa) and stiff, brittle and dry synthetic devices (with mechanical characteristics in the order of GPa) can result in injuries and poor coupling and integration at the implantation site (Llerena Zambrano et al, 2021;Shur et al, 2020). This may introduce chronic inflammation reactions and interfacing issues, resulting in an increase in impedance-due to the formation of astrocytic scars and microglia populations-and a decrease in detection and stimulation efficiency-because of delamination phenomena (Figure 1c; Dhawan & Cui, 2022;X. Wu & Peng, 2019).…”