| Literature DB >> 28447624 |
Abubakar Abid1,2,3, Jonathan M O'Brien3, Taylor Bensel2,4, Cody Cleveland2,4,5, Lucas Booth2,4, Brian R Smith3, Robert Langer2,4,6, Giovanni Traverso4,5.
Abstract
Electronic devices placed in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract for prolonged periods have the potential to transform clinical evaluation and treatment. One challenge to the deployment of such gastroresident electronics is the difficulty in powering millimeter-sized electronics devices without using batteries, which compromise biocompatibility and long-term residence. We examined the feasibility of leveraging mid-field wireless powering to transfer power from outside of the body to electronics at various locations along the GI tract. Using simulations and ex vivo measurements, we designed mid-field antennas capable of operating efficiently in tissue at 1.2 GHz. These antennas were then characterized in vivo in five anesthetized pigs, by placing one antenna outside the body, and the other antenna inside the body endoscopically, at the esophagus, stomach, and colon. Across the animals tested, mean transmission efficiencies of -41.2, -36.1, and -34.6 dB were achieved in vivo while coupling power from outside the body to the esophagus, stomach, and colon, respectively. This corresponds to power levels of 37.5 μW, 123 μW and 173 μW received by antennas in the respective locations, while keeping radiation exposure levels below safety thresholds. These power levels are sufficient to wirelessly power a range of medical devices from outside of the body.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28447624 PMCID: PMC5406829 DOI: 10.1038/srep46745
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Simulations were performed to estimate mid-field coupling efficiency and specific absorption rate (SAR) of radiation.
(A) The multilayer tissue model (not drawn to scale) used in simulation studies consists of 2 mm of skin, 20 mm of fat, 10 mm of muscle, and 18 mm of stomach tissue arranged as shown. Antennas are placed 4 mm away on either side of the tissue model. (B) The simulated transmission coefficient or S21 parameter is shown as a function of distance through the multilayer tissue model. The dotted lines show the transitions between different tissue. From left to right, they are: air-skin, skin-fat, fat-muscle, and muscle-stomach tissue. The efficiency across the complete multilayer tissue is about −41 dB. (C) For the SAR calculations, a 10-g mass of tissue (striped blue; a cube of tissue of side length 2.15 cm, not drawn to scale), directly under the center of transmitting antenna, was used. The location of the tissue was based on inspection of the SAR in different planes in the x-axis, as indicated by the labels on the right side of the tissue model. (D) The relative magnitude of SAR is shown in different slices (planes in the x-direction). Each slice is labeled with its distance from the transmitting antenna. Red indicates regions of high absorption, while blue indicates regions of low absorption. In the slices that are outside of the tissue (at x = 1 and x = 58 mm), the magnitude of the mean-squared electric field is plotted instead of the absorption. The color scale is for qualitative comparison within a slice only, as the scale differs among slices. (E) Averaged value of SAR is as a function of the power delivered into the transmitting antenna. IEEE sets a low-tier (blue) and high-tier (red) standard for safety limits.
Figure 2Tests in stomach tissue identified optimal antennas for in vivo work.
(a) 1.2 GHz small loop antenna fabricated on FR4 substrate with lumped components soldered onto the board. (b) Antennas were encapsulated and then placed in ground porcine stomach tissue, separated at various distances to characterize the transmission efficiency. (c) The measured transmission coefficient or S21 parameter is shown as a function of distance. Six measurements were taken for each distance in different parts of the tissue. The error bars shown the maximum and minimum values recorded from the six measurements at each distance. The solid line passes through the mean of the maximum and minimum measurement.
Figure 3Receiving antennas were placed endoscopically in three locations in anesthetized swine for in vivo measurements.
The locations are shown schematically in (a) and under x-rays (b). The locations were 30 cm through the mouth into the esophagus, 75 cm through the mouth into the stomach, and 25 cm through the rectum into the colon. (c) The measured transmission efficiency or S21 parameter is shown in the esophagus, stomach, and colon in each of the five animals. Within each animal, the standard deviation in measured efficiency was minimal (less than 0.2 dB) during the optimal 6-second observation window and is not shown in the plot.
Power characteristics of GI-resident electronics.
| GI Tract Location | Mean Power delivereda |
|---|---|
| Esophagus | 37.5 μW |
| Stomach | 123 μW |
| Colon | 175 μW |
| CMOS Imager | 3.4 μJ per frame |
| Low-power pacemaker | 8 |
| Bluetooth-enabled temperature sensor | 30 |
| Locomotive implants | 250 |
aMeans were calculated after converting from logarithmic units to linear units. More information, including standard deviations, are included in the Supplementary Materials.