| Literature DB >> 33277523 |
Keivan Keramatzadeh1, Ali Kiakojouri1, Mohammad Sadegh Nahvi1, Yousef Khazaei1, Ali Feizi-Nejad1, Mohammad Hossein Maghami1,2, Reza Mohammadi3, Mohammadali Sharifshazileh4, Soraya Nasiri1, Farhad Akbari Boroumand5, Ebrahim Nadimi5, Mahmoud Rezaei6, Amir Shojaei6, Javad Mirnajafi-Zadeh6, Amir M Sodagar7.
Abstract
This paper reports on the design, development, and test of a multi-channel wireless micro-electrocorticography (µECoG) system. The system consists of a semi-implantable, ultra-compact recording unit and an external unit, interfaced through a 2.4 GHz radio frequency data telemetry link with 2 Mbps (partially used) data transfer rate. Encased in a 3D-printed 2.9 cm × 2.9 cm × 2.5 cm cubic package, the semi-implantable recording unit consists of a microelectrode array, a vertically-stacked PCB platform containing off-the-shelf components, and commercially-available small-size 3.7-V, 50 mAh lithium-ion batteries. Two versions of microelectrode array were developed for the recording unit: a rigid 4 × 2 microelectrode array, and a flexible 12 × 6 microelectrode array, 36 of which routed to bonding pads for actual recording. The external unit comprises a transceiver board, a data acquisition board, and a host computer, on which reconstruction of the received signals is performed. After development, assembly, and integration, the system was tested and validated in vivo on anesthetized rats. The system successfully recorded both spontaneous and evoked activities from the brain of the subject.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33277523 PMCID: PMC7718888 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-77953-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Illustration of two versions of the ultra-compact minimally-invasive ECoG recording microsystem and their placement for sub-dural recording. (b) Functional block diagram of the system, comprising the recording unit and the external unit interfaced through wireless connection.
Figure 2Two versions of the microelectrode array used in this work. (a) The rigid microelectrode array implemented on a PLA substrate with gold electrodes. (b) The flexible microelectrode array microfabricated on a polyimide substrate with titanium electrodes. (c) Photograph of Version-1 of the actual implantable unit after assembly and integration.
Figure 3(a) Test and validation of the Version-1 recording unit in saline, (b) oscilloscope screenshot for the test shown in (a) with the input prerecorded ECoG signal at the bottom and the output amplified signal at the top, (c) impedance spectroscopy for the rigid microelectrode array, (d) impedance spectroscopy for the flexible microelectrode array.
Figure 4(a) Placement of both versions of the microelectrode array on the somatosensory cortex of the brain of the subject. (b) In-vivo experimental setup inside a Faraday cage for ECoG recording from the brain of an anesthetized rat. (c) Test and validation of the flexible microelectrode array in vivo. (d) A sample ECoG signal recorded in vivo on one electrode of the flexible microelectrode array. (e) A sample ECoG signal recorded in vivo on one electrode of the rigid microelectrode array.
Figure 5In-vivo recording of spontaneous neuronal activities from somatosensory cortex of the brain of an anesthetized rat. (a) Recorded signals in the time domain. (b) Correlogram of the recorded activities. (c) Spectrogram of the signals on all the 6 channels. (d) Colormap diagram of the RMS amplitude of the recorded signals.
Figure 6In-vivo recording of evoked activities. (a) Applying electrical stimulus to the hind paw of the subject, (b) recorded signals, (c) spectrogram, (d) colormap diagram of the RMS amplitude of the recorded signals, and (e) power spectral densities of the signals recorded on all the six channels in both spontaneous and evoked experiments.
Summary of specifications for the system reported in this particle in comparison with those of other recent works.
| Sampling frequency (kHz) | No. of channels | Resolution (bit) | Power consumption | Data communication | Wireless data rate | Device size | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Distributed ECoG systems | [ | 25 | 64 | Up to 16 | 2.8 W* | Hardwired | - | 15.5 cm × 9.9 cm (Eval. board size)* |
| [ | 1 | 64 | Up to 16 | 2.8 W* | Hardwired | - | > 15.5 cm × 9.9 cm (Eval. board size)* | |
| Compact ECoG systems | [ | 1 | 128 | 10 | 140 mW | RF (Microsemi ZL70102) | 515 Kbps | 4.6 × 3.2 × 0.4 cm3 |
| [ | 1 | 64 | 12 | 75 mW | MICS band 402–405 MHz | 450 Kbps | 5 cm diameter antenna: 10cm2 | |
| Integrated ECoG systems | [ | 1 | 64 | 15 | 225 μW | RF link | 1 Mbps | 6.5 mm diameter |
| [ | 1-31.25 | 16 | 8 | 365 μW | ISCOM | 10 Kbps | 1.3 cm3 volume | |
| Ultra-compact ECoG systems | [ | 5 | 16/32 | Up to 16 | N/A | Hardwired | - | > 10 × 6 × 3 cm3 |
| This work | 1 | 8/36/72 | 10 | 209 mW | RF link | 2 Mbps | 2.9 × 2.9 × 2.5 cm3 |
*These systems use Intan RHD2000 evaluation board for recording. Power consumption and device size are according to the catalog of this board.
Figure 7Development and integration of the semi-implantable recording unit. (a) The 3D-printed PLA substrate for the rigid MEA. (b) Cross-sectional view of the gold electrodes added to the rigid substrate. (c) Microfabrication process flow for the flexible MEA. (d,e) Illustration of the integration of Version-1 and Version-2 of the recording units, respectively. (f) The stacked PCB platform containing the electronic circuitry and batteries.