OBJECTIVE: Neural prostheses employing platinum electrodes are often constrained by a charge/charge-density parameter known as the Shannon limit. In examining the relationship between charge injection and observed tissue damage, the electrochemistry at the electrode-tissue interface should be considered. The charge-storage capacity (CSC) is often used as a predictor of how much charge an electrode can inject during stimulation, but calculating charge from a steady-state i-E curve (cyclic voltammogram) over the water window misrepresents how electrodes operate during stimulation. We aim to gain insight into why CSC predictions from classic i-E curves overestimate the amount of charge that can be injected during neural stimulation pulsing. APPROACH: In this study, we use a standard electrochemical technique to investigate how platinum electrochemistry depends on the potentials accessed by the electrode and on the electrolyte composition. MAIN RESULTS: The experiments indicate: (1) platinum electrodes must be subjected to a 'cleaning' procedure in order to expose the maximum number of surface platinum sites for hydrogen adsorption; (2) the 'cleaned' platinum surface will likely revert to an obstructed condition under typical neural stimulation conditions; (3) irreversible oxygen reduction may occur under neural stimulation conditions, so the consequences of this reaction should be considered; and (4) the presence of the chloride ion (Cl-) or proteins (bovine serum albumin) inhibits oxide formation and alters H adsorption. SIGNIFICANCE: These observations help explain why traditional CSC calculations overestimate the charge that can be injected during neural stimulation. The results underscore how careful electrochemical examination of the electrode-electrolyte interface can result in more accurate expectations of electrode performance during applied stimulation.
OBJECTIVE: Neural prostheses employing platinum electrodes are often constrained by a charge/charge-density parameter known as the Shannon limit. In examining the relationship between charge injection and observed tissue damage, the electrochemistry at the electrode-tissue interface should be considered. The charge-storage capacity (CSC) is often used as a predictor of how much charge an electrode can inject during stimulation, but calculating charge from a steady-state i-E curve (cyclic voltammogram) over the water window misrepresents how electrodes operate during stimulation. We aim to gain insight into why CSC predictions from classic i-E curves overestimate the amount of charge that can be injected during neural stimulation pulsing. APPROACH: In this study, we use a standard electrochemical technique to investigate how platinum electrochemistry depends on the potentials accessed by the electrode and on the electrolyte composition. MAIN RESULTS: The experiments indicate: (1) platinum electrodes must be subjected to a 'cleaning' procedure in order to expose the maximum number of surface platinum sites for hydrogen adsorption; (2) the 'cleaned' platinum surface will likely revert to an obstructed condition under typical neural stimulation conditions; (3) irreversible oxygen reduction may occur under neural stimulation conditions, so the consequences of this reaction should be considered; and (4) the presence of the chloride ion (Cl-) or proteins (bovine serum albumin) inhibits oxide formation and alters H adsorption. SIGNIFICANCE: These observations help explain why traditional CSC calculations overestimate the charge that can be injected during neural stimulation. The results underscore how careful electrochemical examination of the electrode-electrolyte interface can result in more accurate expectations of electrode performance during applied stimulation.
Authors: Rylie A Green; Rachelle T Hassarati; Josef A Goding; Sungchul Baek; Nigel H Lovell; Penny J Martens; Laura A Poole-Warren Journal: Macromol Biosci Date: 2012-02-17 Impact factor: 4.979
Authors: Doe W Kumsa; Narendra Bhadra; Eric M Hudak; Shawn C Kelley; Darrel F Untereker; J Thomas Mortimer Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2016-08-12 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Rylie A Green; Rachelle T Hassarati; Lucie Bouchinet; Chaekyung S Lee; Gin L M Cheong; Jin F Yu; Christopher W Dodds; Gregg J Suaning; Laura A Poole-Warren; Nigel H Lovell Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2012-05-30 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Jana Schwieger; Anika Hamm; Michael M Gepp; André Schulz; Andrea Hoffmann; Thomas Lenarz; Verena Scheper Journal: J Tissue Eng Date: 2020-04-17 Impact factor: 7.813
Authors: Alexander R Harris; Carrie Newbold; Dimitra Stathopoulos; Paul Carter; Robert Cowan; Gordon G Wallace Journal: Micromachines (Basel) Date: 2022-01-09 Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Julius Zimmermann; Kai Budde; Nils Arbeiter; Francia Molina; Alexander Storch; Adelinde M Uhrmacher; Ursula van Rienen Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol Date: 2021-12-08