Mertcan Han1, Shashi Bhushan Srivastava1, Erdost Yildiz2, Rustamzhon Melikov1, Saliha Surme3, Itir Bakis Dogru-Yuksel4, Ibrahim Halil Kavakli3,5, Afsun Sahin2,6, Sedat Nizamoglu1,4. 1. Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Koc University, Istanbul 34450, Turkey. 2. Koc University Research Center for Translational Medicine, Koc University, Istanbul 34450, Turkey. 3. Molecular Biology and Genetics, College of Science, Koc University, Istanbul 34450, Turkey. 4. Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences and Engineering, Koc University, Istanbul 34450, Turkey. 5. College of Engineering, Chemical and Biological Engineering, Koc University, Istanbul 34450, Turkey. 6. Department of Ophthalmology, Medical School Koc University, Istanbul 34450, Turkey.
Abstract
Neural interfaces are the fundamental tools to understand the brain and cure many nervous-system diseases. For proper interfacing, seamless integration, efficient and safe digital-to-biological signal transduction, and long operational lifetime are required. Here, we devised a wireless optoelectronic pseudocapacitor converting the optical energy to safe capacitive currents by dissociating the photogenerated excitons in the photovoltaic unit and effectively routing the holes to the supercapacitor electrode and the pseudocapacitive electrode-electrolyte interfacial layer of PEDOT:PSS for reversible faradic reactions. The biointerface showed high peak capacitive currents of ∼3 mA·cm-2 with total charge injection of ∼1 μC·cm-2 at responsivity of 30 mA·W-1, generating high photovoltages over 400 mV for the main eye photoreception colors of blue, green, and red. Moreover, modification of PEDOT:PSS controls the charging/discharging phases leading to rapid capacitive photoresponse of 50 μs and effective membrane depolarization at the single-cell level. The neural interface has a device lifetime of over 1.5 years in the aqueous environment and showed stability without significant performance decrease after sterilization steps. Our results demonstrate that adopting the pseudocapacitance phenomenon on organic photovoltaics paves an ultraefficient, safe, and robust way toward communicating with biological systems.
Neural interfaces are the fundamental tools to understand the brain and cure many nervous-system diseases. For proper interfacing, seamless integration, efficient and safe digital-to-biological signal transduction, and long operational lifetime are required. Here, we devised a wireless optoelectronic pseudocapacitor converting the optical energy to safe capacitive currents by dissociating the photogenerated excitons in the photovoltaic unit and effectively routing the holes to the supercapacitor electrode and the pseudocapacitive electrode-electrolyte interfacial layer of PEDOT:PSS for reversible faradic reactions. The biointerface showed high peak capacitive currents of ∼3 mA·cm-2 with total charge injection of ∼1 μC·cm-2 at responsivity of 30 mA·W-1, generating high photovoltages over 400 mV for the main eye photoreception colors of blue, green, and red. Moreover, modification of PEDOT:PSS controls the charging/discharging phases leading to rapid capacitive photoresponse of 50 μs and effective membrane depolarization at the single-cell level. The neural interface has a device lifetime of over 1.5 years in the aqueous environment and showed stability without significant performance decrease after sterilization steps. Our results demonstrate that adopting the pseudocapacitance phenomenon on organic photovoltaics paves an ultraefficient, safe, and robust way toward communicating with biological systems.
Stimulation
of nerve tissue is an essential tool in neurotherapeutics,
neural prosthetics, and biomedical research.[1] Semiconductor and metal devices were already used as stimulation
platforms in deep-brain stimulation to regulate brain activity and
in neuroscientific research to recognize complex neural networks.
However, the spatial resolution of the stimulating currents limits
their efficacy and the electrical wiring of these devices also introduces
difficulty in surgery.[2−6] Alternatively, photovoltaic stimulation eliminates the need for
electrical wiring, which makes it a powerful and less invasive alternative
to electrode-based devices used in the last decade.[7,8] Moreover,
it reduces device–tissue mechanical mismatch, which is an obstacle
for metal or bulk silicon devices as the rigidness causes scar tissue
formation and contact problems with biological tissues.[6,9]In organic photovoltaic platforms, stimulation is achieved
by the
faradic,[10,11] photothermal,[12] or capacitive[13] phenomenon. Among these
stimulation mechanisms, the capacitive mechanism is based on the perturbation
of the ions in the electrolyte/electrode interface and generates stimulating
potential fields on the cell membrane. This offers a rapid and safe
charge-injection mechanism for cell stimulation due to suppressed
redox reactions and heating effect. In terms of capacitive organic
biointerfaces, so far organic pigments such as indigo,[14] pi-conjugated polymers,[15] p–n semiconducting organic nanocrystals,[16] and quantum dot integrated organic polymers[17,18] have been used to generate capacitive photocurrents. These biointerfaces
utilized double-layer capacitance for capacitive neuromodulation.One promising approach increasing the capacitive current can be
adaptation of the supercapacitor technology to organic biointerfaces.
In addition to the double-layer capacitance, supercapacitors advantageously
introduce the pseudocapacitance based on fast and reversible redox
reactions. In these devices, the pseudocapacitance can be more than
2 orders of magnitude higher than the double layer and significantly
increase the total interfacial capacitance.[19] In organic supercapacitors, this is achieved by the electron-charge
transfer between the electrolyte solution and the electrode originated
from an adsorbed ion. The ion does not form a chemical bond as only
charge transfer occurs in charging. The reactions are reversed after
the discharge, which secures from the introduction of any toxic material
or pH change to the cellular environment.Here, we report a
neural interface combining pseudocapacitors with
organic photovoltaics for safe and efficient photostimulation of neurons.
For that, a bulk heterojunction photovoltaic unit is integrated with
a supercapacitor electrode where Au acts as a hole collector and PEDOT:PSS
acts as the pseudocapacitive interfacial layer that hosts polarized
solvent molecules and specifically adsorbed ions via reversible faradic
reactions (Figure a). The band alignment match of the highest occupied molecular orbital
(HOMO) levels facilitates effective routing of holes to the PEDOT:PSS
for efficient conversion of light-to-capacitive currents. This leads
to a fast photoresponse of 50 μs for high-speed communication
with living systems and high current peaks of ∼3 mA·cm–2 with total charge injection of ∼1 μC·cm–2 at a responsivity of 30 mA·W–1. Moreover, the neural interface simultaneously offers seamless biointegration
via wireless operation; broadband visible communication covering blue,
green, and red spectral regions; long operation lifetime over 1.5
years in an aqueous environment; stability without any visible delamination
or significant performance decrease after sterilization steps under
UV and ethanol treatments; and biocompatibility due to incorporation
of nontoxic materials. Furthermore, the charging/discharging of capacitive
current can be tuned by changing the additive concentration of the
PEDOT:PSS, which leads to the control of the transmembrane depolarization/hyperpolarization
phases at the single-cell level.
Figure 1
Device architecture and material characteristics.
(a) Structure
of the organic photovoltaic pseudocapacitor biointerface. It incorporates
a photovoltaic unit composed of ITO/ZnO/P3HT:PCBM and a pseudocapacitor
made of Au/PEDOT:PSS. Light stimulation in the photovoltaic unit causes
charge separation in the photoactive layer. Au was used as the hole
collector, and PEDOT:PSS operates as the pseudocapacitive interfacial
layer to host polarized solvent molecules and also specifically adsorb
ions for reversible faradic reactions. (b) Energy band diagram of
the organic photovoltaic pseudocapacitor. (c) Ultraviolet-to-visible
absorption spectrum of the biointerface.
Device architecture and material characteristics.
(a) Structure
of the organic photovoltaic pseudocapacitor biointerface. It incorporates
a photovoltaic unit composed of ITO/ZnO/P3HT:PCBM and a pseudocapacitor
made of Au/PEDOT:PSS. Light stimulation in the photovoltaic unit causes
charge separation in the photoactive layer. Au was used as the hole
collector, and PEDOT:PSS operates as the pseudocapacitive interfacial
layer to host polarized solvent molecules and also specifically adsorb
ions for reversible faradic reactions. (b) Energy band diagram of
the organic photovoltaic pseudocapacitor. (c) Ultraviolet-to-visible
absorption spectrum of the biointerface.
Results
Principle
of the Biointerface Design, Architecture, and Operation
The
photovoltaic pseudocapacitor was fabricated by successive deposition
of multiple layers onto indium tin oxide (ITO)-coated glass substrates
in the following order: zinc oxide (ZnO), poly(3-hexylthiophene-2,5-diyl):[6,6]-phenyl-C61-butyric
acid methyl ester (P3HT:PCBM), gold (Au), and PEDOT:PSS (Figure a). Formation of
the architecture requires a pseudocapacitive surface material for
fast reversible redox reactions. For that, we selected PEDOT doped
with PSS (PEDOT:PSS), which has been widely used for organic bioelectronics
due to its water dispersibility, ease to be coated as thin films,
environmental stability, biocompatibility, and mechanical flexibility.[20] Moreover, PEDOT:PSS, known for its high electrolytic
capacitance, is advantageous to be used in an electronic system because
of its electrical tunability, high hole mobility, and conductivity.[21] Since a charge collector should be placed near
the conductive polymer electrode, the Au layer was used with PEDOT:PSS
side by side,[22] which is also used in microelectrode
arrays to record neural activity.[23,24] Au was chosen
because of its work function match with the HOMO level of the PEDOT:PSS
for hole collection (Figure b). Moreover, in our design, the charge collector work function
needs to also match with the HOMO level of the photoactive layer to
collect dissociated holes. Hence, Au is a well-matched bridging material
satisfying both requirements.The P3HT and PCBM conjugated polymer
blend, which has absorbance in the visible spectrum (Figure c), was used as the photoactive
layer for charge dissociation and recollection. We enhanced crystallinity
of the photoactive layer by annealing, which also simultaneously leads
to improvement in the surface morphology, increase in the charge generation
efficiency, and elimination of any residual solvents. To promote effective
charge separation in the photovoltaic unit (Figure a), the hole blocker layer ZnO was utilized,
which further dissociates the electrons and holes and mainly guides
electrons toward the transparent ITO electrode.[25] Moreover, the band alignment also facilitated the accumulation
of holes to the PEDOT:PSS (Figure b). Then, the holes in the PEDOT:PSS interfacial layer
attracted solvated ions in the electrolyte (Figure a). This ion attraction stimulates electron-charge
transfer between the electrolyte and PEDOT:PSS layer. Reversible faradic
reactions occur on the surface of the PEDOT:PSS layer (Figure a). Since the HOMO energy of
PEDOT:PSS is higher than the water oxidation energy, any hole-based
nonreversible faradic current generation is limited, which makes it
a convenient candidate as a photovoltaic system using pseudocapacitance.
Conductivity and Stability Optimization by Chemical Modification
of PEDOT:PSS
For the proper operation of the pseudocapacitor,
the surface layer of PEDOT:PSS needs to be properly engineered in
terms of solubility and conductivity. Water solubility and weak cohesion
of the PEDOT:PSS are the main barriers over its potential to be used
in aqueous environments, particularly in biological tissues. For this
reason, it was mostly used as a noninterfacial layer in previous studies.[26] Also, the electrical conductivity of PEDOT:PSS
is low for high-current organic photovoltaics because of the phase
segregation and insulating effect of the PSS components that limit
the connectivity between conductive PEDOT domains.[25] Since the electrochemical activity and ion transport between
the PEDOT chain and the PSS network are based on hydrated pathways,
decreasing the water solubility causes a significant decrease in electrical
conductivity.[22] Hence, low water solubility
while having high conductivity is required.We investigated
different ratios of ethylene glycol (EG), dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO),
and 3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane (GOPS) to enhance the integrity
of PEDOT:PSS films in aqueous environments and to build mechanically
robust, stable, and efficient bioelectronic devices with a PEDOT:PSS
interface. The silane-based cross-linking agent, GOPS, was used to
increase aqueous stability. However, it also increases electrochemical
impedance and decreases electrical conductivity.[27] These drawbacks can be compensated by co-optimization of
the cross-linker with the conductivity enhancers, EG and DMSO. The
effect of weight percentage of DMSO in the PEDOT:PSS solution can
increase film cohesion, electrical conductivity, and current efficiency.[28] Likewise, the addition of the polar solvent
EG can enhance electrical conductivity and change the PEDOT:PSS film
morphology by aggregating PEDOT:PSS particles and increasing surface
roughness. This is also beneficial to increase interfacial capacitance
by improving the impregnation of the insulating environment and providing
a proper interface for cell attachment and growth.To observe
the biointerface stability in aqueous environments and
to test its potential use as an electrophysiological stimulation platform,
we measured photocurrent generation and investigated biointerface
integrity at various concentration levels of the cross-linking agent
GOPS (0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 5 wt %) in PEDOT:PSS. The photocurrent
was measured between the distant Ag/AgCl bath electrode[29] and a glass capillary electrode in artificial
cerebrospinal fluid (Figure a). Although photocurrent generation was maximized with 0
and 0.5 wt % GOPS contents, the interfacial layer dissolved in the
biological medium and damaged the device in a few minutes. In contrast,
when GOPS increases, the conductivity decreases. Since there is a
trade-off between the biointerface integrity and conductivity, we
chose 1 wt % GOPS as the proper concentration to obtain aqueous stability
without significant decrease of conductivity.
Figure 2
Chemical tuning of the
capacitive and faradic parts of the photoresponse.
(a) Schematic of the photocurrent measurement system. A patch-clamp
electrophysiological recording system was used. Photoelectrodes were
placed in the free-standing mode to mimic the behavior in biological
media. The pipette was positioned close to the surface of the biointerface.
The ITO layer that is in direct contact with the electrolyte was used
as the return electrode. (b) Capacitive and faradic parts of the total
photocurrent with different EG ratios in the PEDOT:PSS solution (n = 6). (c) Representative photoresponse of the Au/PEDOT:PSS-coated
biointerface to define capacitive and faradic parts of the photocurrents.
The blue area on the top shows the light illumination period. The
blue dashed box marks the region shown in the inset. (d) Negative
and positive absolute photocurrent peak ratios with different EG ratios
(n = 6). (e) Representative cellular photoresponse
generated by the biointerface. The gray dashed box marks the region
shown in the inset. (f) Ratio of depolarization and hyperpolarization
for different EG ratios (n = 6). All data are presented
as means ± standard error of the mean (SEM).
Chemical tuning of the
capacitive and faradic parts of the photoresponse.
(a) Schematic of the photocurrent measurement system. A patch-clamp
electrophysiological recording system was used. Photoelectrodes were
placed in the free-standing mode to mimic the behavior in biological
media. The pipette was positioned close to the surface of the biointerface.
The ITO layer that is in direct contact with the electrolyte was used
as the return electrode. (b) Capacitive and faradic parts of the total
photocurrent with different EG ratios in the PEDOT:PSS solution (n = 6). (c) Representative photoresponse of the Au/PEDOT:PSS-coated
biointerface to define capacitive and faradic parts of the photocurrents.
The blue area on the top shows the light illumination period. The
blue dashed box marks the region shown in the inset. (d) Negative
and positive absolute photocurrent peak ratios with different EG ratios
(n = 6). (e) Representative cellular photoresponse
generated by the biointerface. The gray dashed box marks the region
shown in the inset. (f) Ratio of depolarization and hyperpolarization
for different EG ratios (n = 6). All data are presented
as means ± standard error of the mean (SEM).
Tuning of Charge and Discharge Phases
Next, we investigated
the effect of EG concentration on capacitive and faradic photocurrents
while keeping GOPS and DMSO constant (as 1 wt % and 7 vol %), respectively
(Figure b,c). Then,
2 vol % EG concentration showed the highest capacitive photocurrent
level under the same light intensity levels. Since a balanced capacitive
process with symmetric charging and discharging current phases might
be preferred,[30] EG concentration of 7 vol
% that has the peak ratio of 1.1 can satisfy such a symmetric photocurrent
profile. Furthermore, we achieved a controllable way to regulate photocurrent
generation during these phases by tuning electrical properties of
the PEDOT:PSS solution via varying the EG concentration from 0.5 to
10 vol % while keeping the biointerface structure fixed. Unbalanced
capacitive waveforms are also used for neurostimulation of cells as
well,[16] and for that purpose, the EG concentration
of 2 vol % can lead to negative and positive photocurrent peak ratio
of 4.5 (Figure d).
The effect of negative and positive capacitive peaks on depolarization
and hyperpolarization of peak ratios on SHY-5Y cells was also investigated
(Figure e,f). According
to the extracellular two-dimensional (2D) stimulation model by Fromherz,[31] since the capacitive currents that are injected
to the cells though are partially leaked to the cleft, the capacitive
current pattern needs to be proportional to the membrane potential
change. As a result, they showed a similar trend to negative/positive
photocurrent peak ratios in photocurrent measurements (Figure f). Different from the previous
studies, our biointerface shows selective control over peak photocurrent
and total injected charge for both charging and discharging phases.
We achieved a clear control over charging/discharging photocurrent
peaks and total injected charges with the modifications on PEDOT:PSS.
Photocurrent and Photovoltage Generation
To investigate
the contribution of the Au/PEDOT:PSS layer to the biointerface, we
characterized the photocurrent generation by the optimized ITO/ZnO/P3HT:PCBM/Au/PEDOT:PSS
(biointerface) and ITO/ZnO/P3HT:PCBM (control) structures, respectively.
We used a three-electrode photoelectrochemical measurement technique
to obtain photoresponse using chronoamperometry and chronopotentiometry
measurements (Figure a). This experiment was carried out in aCSF solution with 50 ms pulsed
illumination using blue, red, and green LEDs used in photocurrent
measurements, ∼100 mW·cm–2 at a frequency
of 2 Hz with a device illumination area of ∼1 cm2. Although 0.1 M KCl electrolyte solution could be used to obtain
the highest benchmark values of the biointerface, using aCSF solution
is a convenient way to mimic and test in the biological environment.
Chronoamperometry measurements revealed that our biointerface can
generate ∼3.1 mA·cm–2 (Figure b). Moreover, photocurrent
response has a highly capacitive nature with only <1% faradic contribution.[12] To obtain photovoltage benchmark values for
our device, chronopotentiometry measurements revealed that the biointerface
can generate ∼470 mV under 445 nm illumination with power of
∼100 mW·cm–2 (Figure c). The performance of the biointerface under
blue light with 470 mV photovoltage exceeds the photovoltage levels
in recent photocapacitor architectures[14,16,32] and even higher than ∼400 mV under green and
red illumination as well (Figure c). Therefore, the biointerface can operate within
the visible spectrum with high performance. Since the tissue transparency
window is between 620 and 800 nm, having high-performance benchmark
values in red is important for stimulation through brain and skin
tissues.[33] Moreover, the biointerface showed
fast charging and discharging phases, revealing themselves in chronoamperometry
measurements (Figure d,e). The rise time for the charging phase corresponds to ∼50
μs (Figure e,
inset), which is well-suited for high-frequency neuromodulation applications.
The total charge injection was calculated by integrating the photocurrent
transient as 0.9 μC·cm–2. The injected
charge level is comparable to the threshold charge density for neural
prostheses,[34] and even under this low light
intensity, the charge injection was on the order of μC·cm–2 (Figure f).
Figure 3
Photoelectrochemical characterization of the biointerface to explore
benchmark values. (a) Schematic of the photoelectrochemical measurement
system. A potentiostat module combined with platinum and Ag/AgCl electrodes
was utilized for the measurement. The working electrode was directly
connected to the ITO layer with a metal clip as the return electrode
in the system. The device area of ∼1 cm2 was illuminated.
(b) Photocurrent and (c) photovoltage transient response under the
illumination of 445, 530, and 630 nm light pulses with trains of 50
ms, 100 mW·cm–2. (d) Best photocurrent performance
under blue light illumination (445 nm). The blue area on the top shows
the light illumination period. The blue dashed box marks the region
shown in (e). (e) Closeup for photocurrent transient; the green dashed
box marks the region shown in the inset to identify the rise time.
(f) Photocurrent and charge generation correlation with respect to
different illumination powers using 445 nm blue light-emitting diode
(LED).
Photoelectrochemical characterization of the biointerface to explore
benchmark values. (a) Schematic of the photoelectrochemical measurement
system. A potentiostat module combined with platinum and Ag/AgCl electrodes
was utilized for the measurement. The working electrode was directly
connected to the ITO layer with a metal clip as the return electrode
in the system. The device area of ∼1 cm2 was illuminated.
(b) Photocurrent and (c) photovoltage transient response under the
illumination of 445, 530, and 630 nm light pulses with trains of 50
ms, 100 mW·cm–2. (d) Best photocurrent performance
under blue light illumination (445 nm). The blue area on the top shows
the light illumination period. The blue dashed box marks the region
shown in (e). (e) Closeup for photocurrent transient; the green dashed
box marks the region shown in the inset to identify the rise time.
(f) Photocurrent and charge generation correlation with respect to
different illumination powers using 445 nm blue light-emitting diode
(LED).To further investigate the photoelectric
response, a patch-clamp
system was used. Incorporation of the Au/PEDOT:PSS layer facilitated
an increase of the peak photocurrent of 2.3-fold in comparison with
the control at the intensity level of 150 mW·cm–2. Moreover, photoresponse of the biointerface did not exhibit a significant
faradic photocurrent generation. In the optimized device, the faradic
photocurrent level corresponds to 180 pA, which is less than 3% of
the peak photocurrent (Figure a). As seen from the closeup charging peak (Figure a), the photocurrent peak is
higher, while the decay time is also longer for Au/PEDOT:PSS-coated
biointerfaces. Longer decay time reveals that device capacitance is
higher since the discharging phase depends on the device’s
RC time constant. Furthermore, the photoresponse of our biointerface
showed highly photocapacitive processes under not just excitation
in blue but also in green and red windows (Figure b). These results are promising for photostimulation
with different illumination colors as well as white light.
Figure 4
Photocurrent
measurements to identify the spectral response and
total charge injection. (a) Photocurrent response upon illumination
with trains of 50 ms, 120 mW·cm–2 light pulses
for the control (black) and Au/PEDOT:PSS-coated biointerfaces (red).
The blue area on the top shows the light illumination period. The
blue dashed box marks the region shown in the inset to identify capacitive
and faradic parts of the photocurrent. (b) Spectral photoresponse
of the biointerface under 445, 530, and 630 nm light pulses with trains
of 50 ms, 100 mW·cm–2. (c) Photocurrent peaks
under different illumination powers (n = 6). (d)
Charge injection amounts under different illumination powers (n = 6). All data in (c) and (d) are presented as means ±
SEM.
Photocurrent
measurements to identify the spectral response and
total charge injection. (a) Photocurrent response upon illumination
with trains of 50 ms, 120 mW·cm–2 light pulses
for the control (black) and Au/PEDOT:PSS-coated biointerfaces (red).
The blue area on the top shows the light illumination period. The
blue dashed box marks the region shown in the inset to identify capacitive
and faradic parts of the photocurrent. (b) Spectral photoresponse
of the biointerface under 445, 530, and 630 nm light pulses with trains
of 50 ms, 100 mW·cm–2. (c) Photocurrent peaks
under different illumination powers (n = 6). (d)
Charge injection amounts under different illumination powers (n = 6). All data in (c) and (d) are presented as means ±
SEM.Photocurrent enhancement levels
due to the Au/PEDOT:PSS layer is
further characterized at different intensity levels with a second
set of experiments (Figure c,d). For illumination powers larger than 100 mW, the peak
photocurrent started to saturate around 6.5 nA and peak photocurrents
were found as 6.6 ± 0.2 nA under 120 mW·cm–2 illumination (Figure c). A mean ∼2.3-fold enhancement was observed up to the intensity
level of 150 mW·cm–2. The injected charge was
again analyzed by integrating the photocurrent transient response
(Figure d), and a
maximum charge injection of 15 pC is observed at the light intensity
level of 150 mW·cm–2. The charge injection
was higher for the biointerface for each illumination power, and the
total injected charge also increased more than 2.5-fold at the light
intensity level of 150 mW·cm–2 in comparison
with the control. Here, the increase of the charge injection corresponding
to 2.5-fold is larger than the peak current levels due to the longer
discharging time of the biointerface. The faradic current ratio for
all light intensity levels was at a similar level of <3%. Therefore,
both the peak photocurrent and injected charge are strongly increased
without any compromise due to faradic charge generation at higher
intensity levels. The notable increase in photocurrent generation
and charge injection is mainly due to the high electrolytic capacitance
of PEDOT:PSS and incorporation of Au, which also have well-matched
HOMO levels for effective hole transport. Moreover, to evaluate the
effective stimulation distance, the photocurrent gradient is measured
for increasing the distance between the patch pipette and the biointerface–electrolyte
interface. Even for 125 μm distance from the surface, which
is longer than the targeted cell dimensions, the photocurrent is highly
retained by 90%, and the exponential decrease in photocurrent gradient
(Figure S1) shows that charge accumulation
is confined at the interface upon illumination.
Photostability
and Biocompatibility
For biomedical
applications, stability is an important factor limiting the functionality
of the implants. We apply stability tests for the optimized biointerface
structure. To simulate the environment in biological tissues, biointerfaces
were kept completely immersed in aCSF solution and photocurrent was
measured periodically for 60 days. The recorded peak photocurrent
density only decreased by 9.2% after 60 days, relative to the first
day, which corresponds to a device half-time of ∼1.8 years
in an aqueous environment (n = 10). Furthermore,
to investigate the effect of the sterilization process on biointerface
performance, we carried out accelerated stress tests. The test includes
sequential treatments of UV sterilization for 30 min, quadruple treatment
with absolute ethanol, overnight incubation in aCSF medium, a second
UV sterilization for 30 min, and quadruple treatment with absolute
ethanol. After these treatments, photocurrent and total charge generation
only showed a 4% decrease in the photocurrent peak and a 6% decrease
in the total injected charge, respectively. Therefore, our biointerface
configuration proved its stability without any visible delamination
or significant performance decrease after sterilization steps.Another important criterion for implantable and optically stimulated
devices is the photocurrent retention after exposing cyclic and continuous
light illumination.[12] To explore the effect
of cyclic illumination, photocurrent generation was measured during
4000 cycles of illumination using a blue LED (445 nm nominal wavelength),
50 ms, ∼100 mW·cm–2 at the frequency
of 1 Hz (n = 10) (Figure a,b). In comparison to the control device
with 78% retention, the Au/PEDOT:PSS-coated biointerface showed a
higher retention by 94% after 60 days (Figure c). After cyclic illumination tests, devices
were exposed to continuous illumination for 20 h using a blue LED
(445 nm nominal wavelength) with ∼100 mW·cm–2 power (n = 10). Photocurrent generation of the
biointerface again showed 84% conservation of the photocurrent peak
after continuous illumination. For the control device, after 4000
cycles, the faradic part of the photocurrent decreased by 34%, and
after 60 days, it reduced by 22%. The decrease in faradic contribution
supports the capacitive charge generation claims.
Figure 5
Cyclic and continuous
photostability tests and biocompatibility
experiments. (a) Device stability in the biological medium. Biointerfaces
were kept in aCSF for 60 days, and on each of the two days, photocurrent
measurements were repeated to evaluate device stability in the biological
medium (aCSF). Blue areas on the top highlight the light illumination
periods. Blue bars represent 50 ms illumination using a blue LED with
nominal wavelength at 445 nm, 120 mW·cm–2 power.
(b) Peak value of the photocurrent transient over 4000 cyclic illumination
cycles for the control and the biointerface. Photocurrent peaks were
normalized with respect to the value in the first cycle. (c) Time-dependent
cyclic stability. Photocurrent peaks were measured in periodic cyclic
illumination, and measurements were normalized to analyze photostability
over 60 days. (d) Effect of two types of biointerfaces on cell metabolic
activity was assessed by the MTT assay and compared with the ITO control.
An unpaired two-tailed t-test was performed to determine
the level of significance. Each experiment was carried out with at
least three biological replicates (n = 3). *p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant, and
nonsignificant differences are presented as “ns”. (e)
Viability assay for primary astrocytes on the biointerface compared
with the ITO control. An unpaired two-tailed t-test
was performed to determine the level of significance. Each experiment
was carried out with at least three biological replicates (n = 3). *p < 0.05 was considered as
statistically significant, and nonsignificant differences are presented
as ns. (f) Immunofluorescence images of primary astrocytes on ITO
control and the biointerface. Primary astrocytes co-stained with DAPI
and F-Actin, GFAP, Vimentin antibodies, respectively (scale bars:
250 μm).
Cyclic and continuous
photostability tests and biocompatibility
experiments. (a) Device stability in the biological medium. Biointerfaces
were kept in aCSF for 60 days, and on each of the two days, photocurrent
measurements were repeated to evaluate device stability in the biological
medium (aCSF). Blue areas on the top highlight the light illumination
periods. Blue bars represent 50 ms illumination using a blue LED with
nominal wavelength at 445 nm, 120 mW·cm–2 power.
(b) Peak value of the photocurrent transient over 4000 cyclic illumination
cycles for the control and the biointerface. Photocurrent peaks were
normalized with respect to the value in the first cycle. (c) Time-dependent
cyclic stability. Photocurrent peaks were measured in periodic cyclic
illumination, and measurements were normalized to analyze photostability
over 60 days. (d) Effect of two types of biointerfaces on cell metabolic
activity was assessed by the MTT assay and compared with the ITO control.
An unpaired two-tailed t-test was performed to determine
the level of significance. Each experiment was carried out with at
least three biological replicates (n = 3). *p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant, and
nonsignificant differences are presented as “ns”. (e)
Viability assay for primary astrocytes on the biointerface compared
with the ITO control. An unpaired two-tailed t-test
was performed to determine the level of significance. Each experiment
was carried out with at least three biological replicates (n = 3). *p < 0.05 was considered as
statistically significant, and nonsignificant differences are presented
as ns. (f) Immunofluorescence images of primary astrocytes on ITO
control and the biointerface. Primary astrocytes co-stained with DAPI
and F-Actin, GFAP, Vimentin antibodies, respectively (scale bars:
250 μm).Before testing the biointerface
performance with neural cells,
we conducted cell viability measurements using 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl
tetrazolium bromide (MTT) to investigate the biocompatibility of the
device. SH-SY5Y cells grown on our biointerface have high viability
with ITO substrates by 95% (Figure d). Furthermore, to evaluate the cell morphologies,
DAPI and tubulin immunostaining experiments were carried out. The
morphologies of the cells were similar on both the ITO control substrates
(Figure S2a) and the biointerface (Figure S2b). Also, we conducted an MTT viability
assay with primary astrocytes to investigate the innate immune response
to the device. The population of primary astrocytes neither decreases
nor increases significantly compared to the control group (Figure e). In addition to
the viability assay, we observed astrocytes under phase-contrast (Figure S3) and immunofluorescence microscopes.
We did not observe reactive astrocyte morphology in any of the samples
(Figure f). Moreover,
astrocytes well tolerated the stiffness of the interfacial surface[35] (Figure S3). These
results indicate that our biointerface did not exhibit significant
toxic and immune reactive effects to the cells in vitro, which was also expected since the device was composed of materials
proven to be biocompatible.[36]
Neural Photostimulation
Finally, we investigated the
neuromodulation ability of the optimized biointerface. We conducted
our electrophysiological experiment on a model cell line, SH-SY5Y
cells. These types of cell lines, like Xenopus laevis oocyte, Neuro2A, and SH-SY5Y cells, grant a stable testing platform
to explore the neurostimulation capabilities and capacitive coupling
between the biointerface and the cells and are used in a wide variety
of in vitro studies.[11,32,37−39] SH-SY5Y cells were grown on the
photoelectrodes, and they were approximately 30 μm in diameter
(Figure a inset).
First, the IV characteristic of SH-SY5Y cells on the biointerface
was measured under dark conditions, revealing that the cells have
a typical resting membrane potential around −50 mV (Figure b). The intracellular
membrane potential with respect to a distant Ag/AgCl bath electrode
was measured by whole-cell patch-clamp recording[29] under different illumination powers from 10 to 150 mW·cm–2 (Figure a). Since the photocurrent generation is from the biointerface
to the electrolyte in the attached membrane, initial hyperpolarization
of the attached membrane and depolarization in the free cell membrane
are expected to be observed. Recordings indicated an initial quick
depolarization just after the illumination and hyperpolarization after
the termination of the illumination (Figure c). The membrane potential almost reduced
to the resting potential after 3.6 ms. The biointerface can generate
∼41 mV intracellular membrane potential change. Blue-light
illumination caused 2-fold higher photocurrent generation and correspondingly
higher membrane voltage change in comparison with the control (Figure c). Furthermore,
to explore the color-dependent membrane potential, changes under LED
illumination with three different wavelengths of 445, 530, and 630
nm were measured. Similar to the photocurrent measurements, membrane
potential response showed a similar relative behavior to blue, green,
and red lights (comparing Figures b,c and 6d). Depolarization
levels under different light intensities prove that sufficient charge
injection is achieved even under low intensities <100 mW·cm–2 (Figure e). Advantageously, the biointerface can generate depolarization
of the cell membrane even with a stimulation pulse width of 0.1 ms,
and depolarization levels show steady behaviors between 0.1 and 100
ms pulse widths of 445, 530, and 630 nm stimulating light (Figure f). Therefore, our
design shows high stimulation performance under low light intensities
as well as in blue, green, and red windows. Moreover, robust depolarization
levels were achieved under various pulse widths. Though the cell viability
experiments show high biocompatibility of the biointerface, it is
essential to investigate the depolarization behavior after cyclic
stimulation. The depolarization amplitudes among 100 stimulation cycles
showed high retention of 93.46 ± 4.86% with respect to the initial
depolarization upon the first stimulation (Figure g). This indicates the absence of undesired
cellular responses and oxidative damage to the cells.
Figure 6
Neural stimulation experiments
at the single-cell level. (a) Schematic
of the electrophysiology patch-clamp measurement setup. Material thickness
is not in scale. Left inset: image of the patch-clamped SH-SY5Y cell
(scale bar: 30 μm). (b) I–V curve of a measured SH-SY5Y cell. (c) Photostimulation of the SH-SY5Y
cell on the control and the biointerface under illumination of 120
mW·cm–2 with 10 ms illumination pulses. Intracellular
membrane potential with respect to a distant Ag/AgCl electrode was
measured. (d) Photostimulation response of SH-SY5Y cells on the biointerface
under 445, 530, and 630 nm light pulses with trains of 10 ms, 100
mW·cm–2. (e) Depolarization amplitude for different
illumination intensities of blue, red, and green lights (n = 10). (f) Depolarization amplitude for different pulse durations
of blue, red, and green lights (n = 10). (g) Dependence
of depolarization on the stimulus cycles. For each measurement cycle,
the depolarization amplitudes were normalized with respect to the
depolarization value upon the first stimulus (n =
10). All data in (e)–(g) are presented as means ± SEM.
Neural stimulation experiments
at the single-cell level. (a) Schematic
of the electrophysiology patch-clamp measurement setup. Material thickness
is not in scale. Left inset: image of the patch-clamped SH-SY5Y cell
(scale bar: 30 μm). (b) I–V curve of a measured SH-SY5Y cell. (c) Photostimulation of the SH-SY5Y
cell on the control and the biointerface under illumination of 120
mW·cm–2 with 10 ms illumination pulses. Intracellular
membrane potential with respect to a distant Ag/AgCl electrode was
measured. (d) Photostimulation response of SH-SY5Y cells on the biointerface
under 445, 530, and 630 nm light pulses with trains of 10 ms, 100
mW·cm–2. (e) Depolarization amplitude for different
illumination intensities of blue, red, and green lights (n = 10). (f) Depolarization amplitude for different pulse durations
of blue, red, and green lights (n = 10). (g) Dependence
of depolarization on the stimulus cycles. For each measurement cycle,
the depolarization amplitudes were normalized with respect to the
depolarization value upon the first stimulus (n =
10). All data in (e)–(g) are presented as means ± SEM.In comparison with the recent neural stimulation
studies, we observed
that the injected photocurrent amounts and variation of the intracellular
membrane potential are sufficient to elicit action potential on primary
neurons extracted from animals.[26,40] The voltage-gated sodium
channel is mainly responsible for the depolarization phase. Around
8 pC charge generation, recorded in the patch-clamp setup, is necessary
to open sodium-ion channels.[38] Since our
biointerface can generate more than 12 pC (Figure d), it is sufficient to evoke action potentials.
The photoelectrochemical measurements reveal that the biointerface
can generate ∼1 μC charges, which is also sufficient
for photostimulation.[34] Furthermore, extracellular
photocapacitors, having <400 mV photovoltage and <1 mA photocurrent
generation,[32] were demonstrated to generate
action potentials, and our biointerface can generate comparable levels
as well.Organic devices may also stimulate the neurons via
thermocapacitive
and photothermal effects. These effects may induce depolarization
due to phase transition in the phospholipid ordering or induce hyperpolarization
because of the changes in the membrane capacitance. To analyze the
contribution of the thermal effect, we calculated the temperature
induced by light illumination.[12,39] The maximum temperature
that can be produced for 100 mW·cm–2 is less
than 0.8 °C, which is lower than the required temperature change
to generate photothermal current (Appendix 1). Therefore, in our design,
photostimulated depolarization is dominantly based on photocapacitive
mechanisms since faradic contribution to total photocurrent generation
is limited to 3% and thermal effects are negligible.
Discussion
and Conclusions
Inspired by supercapacitor technology, we
showed an optoelectronic
neural interface that integrates a photovoltaic unit with a pseudocapacitor.
The well-matched energy band profile together with pseudocapacitance
significantly increased the capacitive current levels in comparison
with the control photocapacitor structure that only uses double-layer
capacitance. Adapting Au and PEDOT:PSS together as a pseudocapacitive
unit enhanced the hole accumulation toward the cell/device interface
to facilitate reversible faradic reactions. Second, we showed that
the tunability of charging and discharging phases of the capacitive
photoresponse by chemically modifying the PEDOT:PSS layer enabled
a high-level control over the cellular depolarization and hyperpolarization
phases without changing the biointerface architecture. Moreover, the
biointerface also showed strong photoresponse under the main eye-sensitivity
colors of blue, green, and red. Hence, the integration of pseudocapacitors
with organic photovoltaics points out an efficient, configurable,
and broadband information-exchange ability with living systems.The biointerface also indicates a safe and long-term communication
way with cells. The operation mechanism of the biointerface is based
on capacitive charge transfer that uses the perturbation of the ion
concentration and reversible ionic reactions. Since the faradic contribution
is low, the neuromodulation method of the biointerface can be safely
used for long-term stimulation of neurons. Furthermore, the biointerface
did not show any significant toxicity due to the biocompatible material
content, and the wireless structure is another advantage for simpler
surgery without wire-related complications. Also, our biointerface
did not induce innate immune response on the astrocytes, which are
the responsible cells for fibrosis and neuroinflammation, indicating
that our biointerface will not encounter inflammation-related chronic
rejection response in neural tissues.[41] The biointerface had durability in the biological environment, and
it showed robust photoresponse after accelerated stress, cyclic, and
continuous illumination tests. Due to the solution processability,
∼0.5 μm overall layer thickness, and having mechanically
robust compounds,[24,26,42,43] it has high potential to be adapted in planar
and pixelated implants and nervous therapeutics.A broad range
of neural interface architectures can be envisioned
by combining photovoltaics and supercapacitors. Advantageously, a
wide variety of organic materials such as polyaniline (PANI), polypyrrol
(PPy), and polythiophene (PTh)[44] or nanomaterials
such as oxides of transition metals like ruthenium oxide (RuO2)[19] can be integrated into the
device structures. Moreover, these biointerfaces can be used for various
applications. For example, high photovoltage levels under illumination
powers within ocular safety limits show promise for future retinal
prosthetics. The incorporation of materials that have photoresponse
in the near-infrared window in biological tissues can facilitate wireless
deep-brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease and pain management.
Therefore, this study paves the way toward safe, ultraefficient, robust,
configurable, and wireless optoelectronic bridges between inanimate
and biological systems.
Methods
Photoelectrode
Fabrication
Photoelectrodes were fabricated
on glass substrates covered with unpatterned indium tin oxide (ITO)
(Ossila, S111). ITO-coated substrates were cleaned with NaOH solution
for 5 min, tension-active agent in water solution (HELLMANEX II, 3%)
for 15 min, deionized water for 15 min, pure acetone for 5 min, and
isopropyl alcohol for 5 min, all at 55 °C, and then treated with
UV–ozone for 25 min to eliminate any other residues on the
ITO surface. P3HT (95.7% regioregular) and PCBM (>99% pure) were
supplied
by Ossilla and utilized without any further purification. The photoactive
solution was prepared by mixing the donor material (P3HT) and the
acceptor material (PCBM) with the optimized blending ratio of 1:0.6.
P3HT and PCBM were prepared separately in o-dichlorobenzene
with concentrations of 18.75 and 11.25 mg·mL–1, respectively, stirred overnight at 70 °C, and then mixed and
stirred for 3 h at 70 °C. The ZnO precursor solution was prepared
by mixing 219.3 mg of zinc acetate dehydrate (Zn(CH3CO2)2·2H2O) from Sigma-Aldrich in
2 mL of 2-methoxyethanol (C3H8O2)
and 80 mg of ethanolamine (HOCH2CH2NH2) and sonicated for 2 h at 50 °C. The ZnO solution was filtered
through a 0.45 μm PVDF filter, spin-coated onto the ITO substrates
at 2000 rpm for 60 s, and annealed at 280 °C for 15 min. The
photoactive layer was fabricated by spin-coating the P3HT:PCBM blend
onto the ZnO layer at 400 rpm for 180 s and annealed at 150 °C
for 10 min. The Au layer was coated on the photoactive layer using
a thermal evaporator (Bruker, detail) at the rate of 0.02–0.04
nm·s–1 under 6.0 × 10–6 mbar vacuum
pressure with 1, 5, 10, 15, and 30 nm thicknesses for the optimization
procedure to maximize photocurrent generation. The thicknesses of
the ZnO, P3HT:PCBM, and PEDOT:PSS layers are found to be 31, 225,
and 140 nm, respectively (Figure S4), and
the optimized Au layer is 10 nm thick.We systematically varied
the GOPS, EG, and DMSO concentration ratios in the PEDOT:PSS solution
coated onto the ITO/ZnO/P3HT:PCBM/Au structure, at 1500 rpm for 60
s and annealed at 150 °C for 10 min, to maximize the non-faradic
photocurrent without much increase in the faradic photocurrent. We
prepared six types of photoelectrodes by changing the GOPS concentration
in the PEDOT:PSS solution and fixing EG and DMSO concentrations to
maximize the aqueous stability of the PEDOT:PSS biointerface layer.
Once aqueous stability was achieved, EG and DMSO concentrations were
methodically changed to increase the conductivity and coating uniformity
of the PEDOT:PSS solution onto the Au layer.
Photocurrent Measurements
We characterized the optimized
biointerface composed of different EG concentrations under different
pulse conditions. Biointerfaces were illuminated from the top through
the PEDOT:PSS interface layer with trains of 50 ms light pulses of
blue, red, and green LEDs with nominal wavelengths at 445, 630, and
530 nm, respectively (Figure a). Measurement electrodes were not electrically grounded,
and the reference electrode was directly contacted with the electrolyte
to provide the characterization of the devices in a wireless and free-standing
mode, which is the working condition of the implantable photovoltaic
device in biological media. The control and biointerface devices were
partially wiped out from the edges to uncover and use the ITO layer
as the return electrode in the measurement system. A patch-clamp amplifier
was used for recording the photocurrent with the patch pipettes of
∼4 MΩ, which was kept close to the surface, with the
reference electrode silver/silver chloride (Ag/AgCl) in the extracellular
medium (aCSF) (Figure a). We investigated the combined effects of DMSO and EG concentrations
in the PEDOT:PSS layer by evaluating the peak photocurrent and total
charge injection for each enhancer combination (EG 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 5,
7, 10 vol %; DMSO 0, 2, 5, 7, 10, 12, 15 vol %). Concentrations of
these additives were optimized for high capacitive current without
increasing the faradic current. In particular, the capacitive photocurrent
reached its maximum with 7 vol % DMSO and 2 vol % EG in the PEDOT:PSS
solution (Figure a,c,d).
These additive ratios were kept constant for the rest of the experiments
to explore the benchmark values of the biointerface.Photocurrent
measurements were taken using an Olympus T2 upright microscope and
an extracellular patch-clamp (EPC) 800 patch-clamp amplifier (HEKA
Elektronik). An extracellular aCSF aqueous medium was prepared by
mixing 10 mM 4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic acid (HEPES,
Sigma-Aldrich, 83264), 10 mM glucose, 2 mM CaCl2, 140 mM
NaCl, 1 mM MgCl2, and 3 mM KC and mixed with distilled
water, and the pH was calibrated to 7.4 using 1 M NaOH. Thorlab’s
blue (M450LP1), red (M625L4), and green (M530L3) LEDs were used as
the light sources. The LED system was driven by DC2200—High-Power
1-Channel LED Driver with Pulse Modulation (Thorlab’s). The
photocurrent was measured without electrical grounding of the ITO
layer, but the ground was connected to the electrolyte solution to
mimic the biological environment that implantable devices are surrounded
by.
Photoelectrochemical Measurements
Photoelectrochemical
experiments were carried out using an Autolab Potentiostat Galvanostat
PGSTAT (Metrhom, The Netherlands). A three-electrode system consisting
of Ag/AgCl as the reference electrode, platinum wire as the counter
electrode, and connection to the biointerface as the working electrode
was used. All measurements were carried out at room temperature in
an extracellular aCSF medium as the supporting electrolyte solution.
The device was excited with blue, red, and green LEDs with optical
power of 100 mW·cm–2. The optical power was
measured with an optical power meter (Newport 843-R). The data were
analyzed using NOVA software.
SH-SY5Y Cell Culture
The SH-SY5Y cell line was used
in all electrophysiology experiments. SH-SY5Y cells were cultured
in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM, Gibco,
21969-035) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS, Gibco, 10500),
1% l-glutamine (Gibco, 25030-081), and 1% penicillin–streptomycin
(Gibco, 15240-062). Cultures were maintained at 37 °C in a 5%
CO2, 85% humidified incubator. Cells were passaged and
supplied with a fresh medium every 2–3 days.
Primary Astrocyte
Isolation and Cell Culture
All experimental
procedures were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committees of Koç University (Approval No. 2019.HADYEK.023)
according to the Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and
of the Council on the Protection of Animals Used for Scientific Purposes.
The cortical tissues were extracted from decapitated E15–E17
Wistar Albino rats and were placed immediately in ice-cold HEPES buffered
DMEM. The cortices were incubated in 0.25% Trypsin-EDTA solution (Thermo
Fisher Scientific, 25200072) with 2% DNase-I supplement (NeoFroxx,
9003-98-9) for 25 min in a 37 °C incubator. Then, the cells were
centrifuged, and the supernatant was changed with DMEM supplemented
with 10% FBS and 1% penicillin/streptomycin. Then, the cell suspension
was filtered through 120 and 45 μm nylon mesh filters, respectively.
After filtration, the cell suspension was seeded to 250 mL noncoated
culture flasks in 10 mL of DMEM with FBS. The cells were incubated
at a 37 °C, 10% CO2 atmosphere, and their medium was
changed on day 3. On day 6, the cell culture medium was changed again,
and the flasks were shaken overnight at 80 rpm at room temperature.
The detached cells were washed with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS,
Gibco, 10010031), and 10 mL of DMEM was added with FBS on attached
cells in the flask. Cells were cultured at 37 °C, 10% CO2, until they reached confluency. After confluency, the cells
were trypsinized and seeded to poly-d-lysine (PDL, Sigma-Aldrich,
P6407)-coated flasks in DMEM with FBS.[45]
Biocompatibility Tests
To investigate the cell viability
and cell proliferation of SH-SY5Y cells and primary astrocytes on
our biointerfaces, the MTT viability assay was used. The growth medium
was prepared using Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium
with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum and antibiotics. The
MTT cell viability assay (Abcam, ab211091) was utilized to evaluate
the biocompatibility of our biointerface. The devices were sterilized
first by cleaning with 70% ethanol followed by air-drying. The surface
was further sterilized under UV irradiation for 30 min. The substrates
were placed in six-well plates. SH-SY5Y cells were seeded (3 ×
105 cells per well) on the substrates in DMEM with 10%
FBS, and after 48 h of incubation, the medium was replaced with 1
mL of MTT solution (5 mg·mL–1 in PBS, pH =
7.4) and 4 mL of DMEM mixture per well. Concurrently, primary astrocytes
were seeded (2 × 105 cells per well) on the substrates
in DMEM with 10% FBS, and after 72 h of incubation, which is the sufficient
time to induce innate immune response, the medium was replaced with
1 mL of MTT solution (5 mg·mL–1 in PBS, pH
= 7.4) and 4 mL of DMEM mixture per well. Then, for an additional
4 h, the cells were incubated at a 37 °C, 5% CO2 atmosphere.
The medium was vacuumed from each well, and substrates were transferred
to an empty six-well plate. In each well, a 1:1 mixture of DMSO and
ethanol was added to dissolve the formazan crystals. The solution
was transferred to a 96-well plate, and the absorbance was measured
at 600 nm (for background) and at 690 nm (for absorbance) with a Synergy
H1Micro-plate Reader (Bio-Tek Instruments). The relative cell viability
was calculated as follows: viability = (ODsample/ODcontrol) × 100. The optical density (OD) of the sample
was obtained from the cells grown on a photoelectrode, and the OD
of the control was obtained from the cells grown on the ITO substrates.
Immunofluorescence Staining and Imaging
SH-SY5Y cells
(2.5 × 105 cells per sample) were seeded on the ITO
control substrate and the biointerface and incubated for 48 h at 37
°C in a cell culture incubator. Primary astrocytes (2 ×
105 cells per sample) were seeded on the ITO control substrate
and the biointerface in a similar way and incubated for 72 h at 37
°C in a cell culture incubator. After incubation, both cells
were fixed by 4% paraformaldehyde and washed three times with PBS-T
(phosphate-buffered saline, 0.1% Triton X-100). Cells were blocked
in PBS solution containing 5% BSA (bovine serum albumin) and 0.1%
Triton X-100. SH-SY5Y samples were incubated with the mouse anti-β-III
tubulin primary antibody (Sigma-Aldrich, T8578) 2 h and washed three
times with PBS-T. Primary astrocyte samples were incubated with rabbit
anti-GFAP (Abcam, ab7260) and rabbit antivimentin (Abcam, ab92547)
primary antibodies overnight, as selective markers of astrocytes,
and washed three times with PBS-T. For visualization of the cytoskeleton,
SH-SY5Y samples were incubated with the goat antimouse IgG H&L
Alexa Fluor 488 secondary antibody (Abcam, ab150113) with DAPI (D1306,
Sigma), and primary astrocyte samples were incubated with the FITC-conjugated
phalloidin antibody (Sigma-Aldrich, P5282) for 90 min at 37 °C.
Astrocyte samples were incubated with goat antirabbit IgG H&L
Alexa Fluor 555 (Cell Signaling Technology, 4413) and goat antirabbit
IgG H&L Alexa Fluor 647 (Abcam, ab150079) secondary antibodies
for fluorophore markings of anti-GFAP and antivimentin primary antibodies
for 90 min at 37 °C, respectively. All samples were washed three
times with PBS-T and then mounted with a DAPI-supplemented mounting
medium (Abcam, ab104139) to observe nuclei. Finally, immunofluorescence
imaging was done using fluorescence (Axio Observer Z1, Zeiss) and
confocal (TCS SP8 DLS, Leica) microscopes.
Electrophysiology Experiments
Electrophysiology experiments
were performed by the EPC 800 patch-clamp amplifier (HEKA Elektronik).
The biointerface was cleaned with 70 vol % ethanol solution and incubated
for 3 days in DI water. The pulled patch pipettes of 4–6 MΩ
were used to conduct the whole-cell patch-clamp experiment. The extracellular
medium (aCSF) was prepared as previously mentioned. The internal cellular
medium was prepared by mixing 140 mM KCl, 2 mM MgCl2, 10
mM HEPES, 10 mM ethylene glycol-bis(β-aminoethyl ether)-N,N,N′,N′-tetraacetic acid (EGTA), and 2 mM Mg-ATP in water,
and the pH was calibrated to 7.2–7.3 using 1 M KOH. Patch pipettes
were filled with the intracellular solution. A digital-camera-integrated
Olympus T2 upright microscope was used to patch and monitor the cells.
The whole-cell patched cells were observed up to 1 h to investigate
the possible damage done by patched pipettes.
Authors: Dion Khodagholy; Thomas Doublet; Moshe Gurfinkel; Pascale Quilichini; Esma Ismailova; Pierre Leleux; Thierry Herve; Sébastien Sanaur; Christophe Bernard; George G Malliaras Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2011-08-09 Impact factor: 30.849
Authors: Dion Khodagholy; Jonathan Rivnay; Michele Sessolo; Moshe Gurfinkel; Pierre Leleux; Leslie H Jimison; Eleni Stavrinidou; Thierry Herve; Sébastien Sanaur; Róisín M Owens; George G Malliaras Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2013 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Keith Mathieson; James Loudin; Georges Goetz; Philip Huie; Lele Wang; Theodore I Kamins; Ludwig Galambos; Richard Smith; James S Harris; Alexander Sher; Daniel Palanker Journal: Nat Photonics Date: 2012-05-13 Impact factor: 38.771