Intracortical Microelectrode Array Unit Yield under Chronic Conditions: A Comparative Evaluation

While microelectrode arrays (MEAs) offer the promise of elucidating functional neural circuitry and serve as the basis for a cortical neuroprosthesis, the challenge of designing and demonstrating chronically reliable technology remains. Numerous studies report chronic data but the actual time spans and performance measures corresponding to the experimental work vary. In this study, we reviewed the experimental durations that constitute chronic studies across a range of MEA types and animal species to gain an understanding of the widespread variability in reported study duration. For rodents, which are the most commonly used animal model in chronic studies, we examined active electrode yield (AEY) for different array types as a means to contextualize the study duration variance, as well as investigate and interpret the performance of custom devices in comparison to conventional MEAs. We observed wide-spread variance within species for the chronic implantation period and an AEY that decayed linearly in rodent models that implanted commercially-available devices. These observations provide a benchmark for comparing the performance of new technologies and highlight the need for consistency in chronic MEA studies. Additionally, to fully derive performance under chronic conditions, the duration of abiotic failure modes, biological processes induced by indwelling probes, and intended application of the device are key determinants.

Automated summary

While MEAs hold promise for understanding neural circuitry and neuroprosthetics, designing and demonstrating chronically reliable technology remains a challenge. Variability exists in reported study durations across different MEA types and animal species, with significant differences in chronic implantation periods and linear decay in active electrode yield observed in rodent models implanted with commercially-available devices.