Marsilea A Booth1,2,3, Sally A N Gowers1, Melinda Hersey4, Isabelle C Samper1, Seongjun Park5,6,7, Polina Anikeeva8, Parastoo Hashemi2,4, Molly M Stevens1,2,3, Martyn G Boutelle1. 1. Department of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, U.K. 2. Department of Materials, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, U.K. 3. Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, U.K. 4. Department of Chemistry, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina 29208, United States. 5. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States. 6. Department of Bio and Brain Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon 34141, Republic of Korea. 7. KAIST Institute for Health Science and Technology, Daejeon 34141, Republic of Korea. 8. Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States.
Abstract
Developing tools that are able to monitor transient neurochemical dynamics is important to decipher brain chemistry and function. Multifunctional polymer-based fibers have been recently applied to monitor and modulate neural activity. Here, we explore the potential of polymer fibers comprising six graphite-doped electrodes and two microfluidic channels within a flexible polycarbonate body as a platform for sensing pH and neurometabolic lactate. Electrodes were made into potentiometric sensors (responsive to pH) or amperometric sensors (lactate biosensors). The growth of an iridium oxide layer made the fiber electrodes responsive to pH in a physiologically relevant range. Lactate biosensors were fabricated via platinum black growth on the fiber electrode, followed by an enzyme layer, making them responsive to lactate concentration. Lactate fiber biosensors detected transient neurometabolic lactate changes in an in vivo mouse model. Lactate concentration changes were associated with spreading depolarizations, known to be detrimental to the injured brain. Induced waves were identified by a signature lactate concentration change profile and measured as having a speed of ∼2.7 mm/min (n = 4 waves). Our work highlights the potential applications of fiber-based biosensors for direct monitoring of brain metabolites in the context of injury.
Developing tools that are able to monitor transient neurochemical dynamics is important to decipher brain chemistry and function. Multifunctional polymer-based fibers have been recently applied to monitor and modulate neural activity. Here, we explore the potential of polymer fibers comprising six graphite-doped electrodes and two microfluidic channels within a flexible polycarbonate body as a platform for sensing pH and neurometabolic lactate. Electrodes were made into potentiometric sensors (responsive to pH) or amperometric sensors (lactate biosensors). The growth of an iridium oxide layer made the fiber electrodes responsive to pH in a physiologically relevant range. Lactate biosensors were fabricated via platinum black growth on the fiber electrode, followed by an enzyme layer, making them responsive to lactate concentration. Lactate fiber biosensors detected transient neurometabolic lactate changes in an in vivo mouse model. Lactate concentration changes were associated with spreading depolarizations, known to be detrimental to the injured brain. Induced waves were identified by a signature lactate concentration change profile and measured as having a speed of ∼2.7 mm/min (n = 4 waves). Our work highlights the potential applications of fiber-based biosensors for direct monitoring of brain metabolites in the context of injury.
Chemical monitoring
of human tissue for health is becoming an increasingly
critical target.[1,2] Focusing particularly on the brain,
being able to monitor dynamic changes in neurochemicals is an important
pursuit.[3] Microdialysis is an FDA-approved
sampling technique to monitor human tissue in the clinic.[4] It is able to measure multiple analytes at a
single probe since the sensors are located outside the body. This
external location also means that sensor calibration is more straightforward
than calibration of implanted sensors. Microdialysis has been coupled
to online analysis systems to provide continuous measurements in real
time.[5,6] Due to the requirement of a certain length
of tubing to separate the probe from the sensors, this type of microdialysis
is accompanied by a time delay and, therefore, diffusion-based broadening
of transient concentration changes. The relatively large diameter
of clinical microdialysis probes can damage tissue, invoking a foreign
body response after implantation,[7] an effect
that can be mitigated by retrodialysis of anti-inflammatory agents
such as dexamethasone,[8] or using custom
microfabricated probes with reduced dimensions.[9,10]An alternative approach for making chemical measurements in tissue
is the use of implantable electrochemical sensors. Most implantable
sensors offer improved temporal resolution[11] and a smaller footprint than microdialysis.[12,13] However, implanted sensors have several drawbacks. First, these
sensors typically offer single analyte measurement, although manifold
sensors or sensor arrays are able to perform multianalyte measurements.[14] Second, calibration of implanted sensors is
an ongoing challenge in the community, an issue that complicates accurate
interpretation of in vivo measurements. Third, implantable sensors
lack the capability to recover sample aliquots and to deliver drugs
locally. Finally, Young’s modulus (ability of a material to
withstand changes in length under compression) for these sensors is
significantly different from that of brain tissue.Hybrid multifunctional
probes are an emerging strategy that can
combine the best aspects of both microdialysis and implanted sensors,
thereby overcoming technological limitations. Microfabrication has
been used to create multifunctional and multiplexed devices.[15−17] One study combined microdialysis with optogenetics to monitor extracellular
concentrations of glutamate and dopamine in the medial prefrontal
cortex of rodents after stimulation.[15] In
other work, Altuna et al. developed a multielectrode device with capacity
for neural recording and drug delivery via a microfluidic channel.[16] A microelectrode array coupled to a polydimethylsiloxane
microfluidic channel by Wang et al. demonstrated multianalyte sensing
and local chemical delivery.[17] Multifunctional
probes provide the capability for multianalyte measurements in a single
device and the potential for in situ calibration; however, many examples
of these devices require labor-intensive fabrication and do not overcome
Young’s modulus issue because they are rigid.Thermal
drawing is an elegant fabrication process that incorporates
multiple functionalities in a single entity. The process is initiated
by the construction of a macroscale model preform (template) containing
all the elements required in the final fiber. Thermally drawing this
preform allows retention of components, together with miniaturization
and scalable production.[18,19] Similar fibers have
been used in prior work for detecting neuronal signals, cell growth, and optogenetic
neuromodulation.[19−21] Using this approach, polymer materials can be used
to impart flexibility to the probe. Compared to similarly sized insulated
steel microwires, polymer fibers have been found to evoke lower foreign
body response after implantation,[19] implying
a good level of in vivo biocompatibility. Moreover, the fabrication
of multifunctional fibers using a thermal drawing process brings forth
the ability to perform multiple electrochemical measurements and fluidics
in a single device.This work describes the design, construction,
and development of
fiber-based biosensors with multiple capabilities. Here, we utilize
thermally drawn fibers containing six electrodes fabricated from the
combination of conductive polyethylene and graphite powder and two
microfluidic channels within a polycarbonate body.[19] Although these fibers have been previously applied to monitor
and modulate neural activity in the brain of moving mice,[19] their potential as biochemical sensors remains
to be explored. We demonstrate the microelectrode behavior of the
fiber electrodes and show the multifunctional nature of the fibers
by flowing different solutions through the internal microfluidic channels
and monitoring the response at the electrode surface. We validate
the functionality of a potentiometric pH sensor and an amperometric
lactate biosensor. We have previously shown that sensing neurochemical
and electrophysiological signals in the brain and peripheral tissue
gives valuable insights into brain function and disease pathophysiology.[5,6,19,21−25] Monitoring these different analytes requires different approaches
(potentiometric sensors for pH and potassium and amperometric sensors
for glucose and lactate). This work is a proof-of-concept study illustrating
the validity of using a flexible fiber as either potentiometric or
amperometric electrochemical sensors. Furthermore, the ability of
the lactate sensors is demonstrated in mice to measure physiologically
relevant changes in vivo. New sensing tools, such as described here,
capable of real-time measurement of neurochemical dynamics in the
brain have great potential in the pursuit to measure brain function
and for diagnostics.
Experimental Section
Materials and Reagents
Lactate oxidase (20–60
U/mg) from Aerococcus viridans was
obtained from Sekisui Enzymes. All other reagents were obtained from
Sigma-Aldrich. Phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) was a physiological
saline chosen to match the artificial cerebral spinal fluid of the
brain buffered to pH 7.4.
Design and Fabrication of the Fiber
Design and fabrication
of the fiber has been detailed elsewhere.[19] In brief, a macroscopic template preform was made comprising six
electrodes formed from a custom conductive polymer composite (conductive
polyethylene and 5% graphite), two microfluidic channels, and an optical
waveguide. The optical waveguide was not used in this work. A thermal
drawing process heated the preform near glass transition temperature
and stretched it into ∼100 m-long fiber, reducing feature dimensions
by 50–200-fold.[19] The final fiber
is flexible and can be electrically connectorized for individual electrodes
and fluidic channels. This was performed in a similar manner to that
described elsewhere;[19] however, fluidic
connection was also made from the end of the fiber as the optical
component was not necessary in these experiments (Figure S1). The connectorization process is highly challenging
due to the miniature and multiple-component nature of the fiber. However,
once a fiber is connectorized, the end can be sliced with a sharp
razor blade to cleanly expose a fresh surface, enabling a reusable
fiber.
Microfluidic Flow Experiments
The two microfluidic
channels were individually addressed. Solution was pushed through
each of the microfluidic channels at a speed of 1 μL/min under
the control of a microfluidic pump (Hamilton). Through the first channel
flowed PBS, while the second channel had ferrocene monocarboxylate
solution, named Fc solution (1.5 mM in 100 mM sodium citrate, 150
mM sodium chloride and 1 mM EDTA). The flow was manually controlled
between the two channels. Due to the miniature size of the channels
(ca. 15 μm[19]), blocking occasionally
occurred and there was difficulty in connectorizing the microfluidic
channels.For the flow experiments, a reference and counter
electrode (Ag|AgCl and stainless steel, respectively) were placed
nearby the fiber end, and the electrodes were held at +0.5 V versus
Ag|AgCl. When the solution flowed through the channels, a droplet
of the liquid formed, eventually bridging the electrodes enabling
electrical contact. A video was taken continuously as this happened.
pH Sensor Fabrication
An iridium oxide film was deposited
on a carbon electrode to fabricate a pH sensor. A solution, as described
by Yamanaka,[26] of iridium tetrachloride
hydrate (4.5 mM), hydrogen peroxide (30% w/w), and oxalic acid dihydrate
(0.5 g) in water was used. Anhydrous potassium carbonate was added
to adjust pH to 10.5. The solution was then left standing at room
temperature for 60 h until a deep blue-violet coloration appeared.
When not in use, the solution was stored in the fridge.[27] Using this solution, a film was grown by applying
an amperometric wave form of 300 s at 0.95 V, 10 min at open circuit,
300 s at 0.95 V, 10 min at open circuit, and finally 300 s at 0.95
V. Following rinsing, the pH sensor was used by measuring open circuit
potential versus time under different pH conditions (10 mM PBS, pH
adjusted by the addition of hydrochloric acid or sodium hydroxide
as determined using a Mettler Toledo SevenEasy pH meter and Hanna
Instruments pH probe).
Electrochemical Deposition of Platinum Black
Platinizing
solution consisted of 3 wt % chloroplatinic acid and 0.005 wt % lead
acetate in deionized water. Amperometric deposition with a constant
current density of −30 mA/cm2 was performed for
60 s (vs Ag|AgCl reference electrode with a large surface area platinum
counter electrode) in a stirred solution. After rinsing, the electrode
was cycled in H2SO4 (0.5 M) for 10 cycles between
−0.2 and 1.3 V (scan rate 0.1 V/s). The electrode was then
ready for further functionalization.
Lactate Biosensor Fabrication
Lactate sensor fabrication
was based on methods we have used for platinum microelectrodes detailed
elsewhere.[6,28] Namely, an exclusion layer of poly-m-phenylene diamine (100 mM in PBS, pH 7.4) is electrochemically
deposited on to the electrode surface, followed by dip-coating of
a hydrogel layer [of poly(ethylene glycol) diglycidyl ether] loaded
with the lactate oxidase enzyme. After a curing period, the biosensor
is ready for use or can be stored in the freezer. The lactate presence
is detected using amperometry, where the working electrode is held
at +0.7 V versus Ag|AgCl causing hydrogen peroxide oxidation. Sensor
calibration in a beaker containing PBS (0.01 M PBS) solution allowed
conversion of measured current to lactate concentration. Fitting was
performed with the Michaelis–Menten equation, eq S1.
Monitoring Lactate In Vivo
All animal
procedures were
carried out in accordance with the American laws for animal protection
and institutional guidelines approved by the Institutional Animal
Care and Use Committee (IACUC) at the University of South Carolina.
Two male mice were anesthetized with an i.p. injection of 25% w/v
urethane [Sigma-Aldrich Co., dissolved in 0.9% NaCl solution (Hospira)]
during all surgical procedures. Temperature was maintained by heating
pads below the mouse, routinely replaced as required throughout the
experiment. Stereotaxic surgery was performed in order to drill small
burr-holes in the frontal and parietal cortex for subsequent needle
pricks. Two small holes were drilled at 3 mm posterior and 3 mm lateral,
and 3 mm anterior and 3 mm lateral to Bregma on each hemisphere for
needle pricks. Additionally, two holes were drilled 3 mm lateral to
Bregma in each hemisphere for the lactate biosensor fibers. One biosensor
(fiber) was placed in each hemisphere, with one electrode measuring
lactate signal per fiber. Although holes were drilled and sensors
were placed via stereotaxic positioning, needle pricks were performed
by hand. Spreading depolarizations (SDs) are known to be induced by
manual needle pricks[22,29] and are not position-specific;
therefore, stereotaxic equipment was not required. A chloridized Ag
electrode was used as an Ag|AgCl reference electrode, while a stainless-steel
counter electrode was used. These were both placed in the brain outside
of the experimental region. The fiber was slowly lowered into the
hole and connected. Biosensors were calibrated before and after implantation.
Two in vivo experiments were performed. For experiment number 1, the
right hemisphere contained an area of previously made local damage;
meanwhile, the left hemisphere was untouched and remained fully intact.
The local damage was caused by implantation and removal of a stimulation
electrode for a separate experiment. For experiment number 2, a fiber
with a lactate biosensor was placed in one hemisphere, while a fiber
containing a control electrode (no lactate oxidase present[30]) was placed in the contralateral hemisphere.
For both experiments, only one electrode was connected from each fiber
biosensor due to the two-electrode measurement capacity of the two-channel
wireless potentiostat used.A waiting period of 60 min followed
implantations in order to allow for stabilization. A needle prick
was then performed. This needle prick gives a mechanically induced
focal traumatic injury via a needle prick directly to the brain tissue.[8,22,29] This in turn can give rise to
SD waves. After a further stabilization period of 30 min, a needle
prick in the other hemisphere was performed, and this continued as
the animal conditions allowed, for eight needle pricks in total (experiment
1). Each hemisphere had a 60 min wait period between needle pricks.
In the first animal, no SD wave was observed following the second
needle prick. Therefore, a repeat needle prick after 10 min was performed
in case an error had occurred. The expected SD wave followed. Control
measurements including applying “non contact” needle
pricks, jostling the reference/counter electrode, and aggressively
touching the stereotaxic equipment were performed at the end of the
experiment, and all showed no significant response (Figure S7). At the end of the experiment, the animals were
humanely euthanized.
Electrochemistry Instrumentation and Data
Analysis
Three electrochemical instrumental setups were used.
To characterize
and perform lactate sensing and pH experiments, a 16-channel Powerlab
analogue-to-digital converter (ADInstruments, Sydney, Australia) was
coupled to in-house potentiostats, and data were recorded with LabChart
software version 7.2 (ADInstruments, Sydney, Australia). For amperometric
deposition of platinum black, a CompactStat (Ivium Technologies, the
Netherlands) was used. For in vivo experiments, the setup has been
detailed elsewhere.[31] Briefly, an in-house
built potentiostat was used for measurement, while wirelessly coupled
via bluetooth to a tablet for data recording using in-house built
software. Data analysis was performed using Lab chart (ADInstruments,
Sydney, Australia) and smoothed with a Savitzky–Golay 101 or
201-point filter.
Results and Discussion
Fiber Fabrication and Electrode
Characterization
The
drawn polycarbonate fiber has six electrodes and two microfluidic
channels around the fiber edge,[19]Figure A,B. To expose a
fresh surface, the fiber can be cut using a razor blade and the striations
from this process can be seen in scanning electron microscope (SEM)
images, a representative image shown in Figure B. Classic microelectrode behavior is found
for a reversible solution redox species, Figure C. The electrodes are individually addressable
as evidenced by an increase in current when two electrodes are connected;
however, as can be seen, there is variability in the magnitude of
individual electrode responses. A maximum of five of the six possible
electrodes were connected within a single fiber for this work (Figure S2A) due to the challenge of miniature
connectorization and not requiring all six electrodes; however, full
connectorization is possible.[19] Previous
estimations published by Park et al.[19] and
SEM images suggest electrode dimensions of ∼400–1600
μm2. Estimates of active electrochemical areas based
on the plateau current from Figure C suggest electrode dimensions of 42 and 85 μm2 for electrodes 1 and 2, respectively (eq S2). The fiber draw process, subsequent etching of a sacrificial
outer layer, and fresh surface exposure can cause some geometric distortion
of the electrodes and fluidic channels. This, together with the inhomogeneous
nature of the 5% graphite and conductive polyethylene (gCPE) composite
comprising the electrodes, explains why individual electrodes possess
different electroactive surface areas, as seen in Figure C. Some variability is seen
within fibers and across fibers, Figure S2B,C.
Figure 1
(A) Schematic showing the components of the fiber. Two of the six
gCPE electrodes and one of the two microfluidic channels are highlighted
in yellow and red, respectively. (B) SEM image of a razor blade-sliced
fiber surface showing two electrodes highlighted in yellow and one
of the microfluidic channels in red. One electrode and one microfluidic
channel were damaged during the preparation process (as seen by charging);
however, the remaining elements are functional. This image shows an
example of the as-used fiber surface. (C) CVs of two bare electrodes
in ferrocene monocarboxylate solution (1.5 mM, 10 mV s–1 vs Ag|AgCl) individually (grey and dashed lines) and when connected
together (black line), indicating that they are individually addressable.
(A) Schematic showing the components of the fiber. Two of the six
gCPE electrodes and one of the two microfluidic channels are highlighted
in yellow and red, respectively. (B) SEM image of a razor blade-sliced
fiber surface showing two electrodes highlighted in yellow and one
of the microfluidic channels in red. One electrode and one microfluidic
channel were damaged during the preparation process (as seen by charging);
however, the remaining elements are functional. This image shows an
example of the as-used fiber surface. (C) CVs of two bare electrodes
in ferrocene monocarboxylate solution (1.5 mM, 10 mV s–1 vs Ag|AgCl) individually (grey and dashed lines) and when connected
together (black line), indicating that they are individually addressable.
Microfluidics and Electrochemical Detection
The multifunctional
capability of the fiber can be shown using the fluidic channels and
electrodes. Two solutions were flowed through the microfluidic channels
independently. Electroactive solution (Fc solution) was flowed through
one, while PBS through the other. A fiber with two active electrodes
was placed nearby to a probe containing reference and counter electrodes
(Ag|AgCl and stainless steel, respectively). When a sufficient droplet
of the fluid had bridged the gap between the electrode and the probe,
an electrical connection was made and current flowed, Figure . When the solution flow was
changed from the PBS fluidic channel to the ferrocene-containing channel,
an increase in current was observed as expected at two fiber electrodes,
demonstrating the use of the microfluidics to characterize the electrochemical
response. Variation in response between electrodes 1 and 2 can be
seen in both magnitude and response time. The former can be explained
by the inhomogeneous composition of the electrode material (5% graphite
in gCPE), resulting in differing electroactive surface areas, as seen
in Figures C and S2A. Meanwhile, variation in response time may
be due to the position of the electrode relative to the fluidic channel
and formed droplet. As can be seen in Figure A, the liquid droplet forms asymmetrically
due to gravity and the angle of the fiber. Additionally, the fluidic
channel is geometrically closer to some electrodes than others. Therefore,
one electrode may be exposed to a higher concentration of ferrocene
before the other, resulting in a difference in response time. The
main contributor to changes in current are from faradaic processes,
as seen by Figure S3, where a stable baseline
of current is seen over 300 s when exposed only to PBS solution. For
practical robust use of these fibers, the microfluidic channels require
increased size through fiber optimization and improved connections
to prevent blockages. However, the data reported here show the potential
of such a system with fluidics and electrodes.
Figure 2
Fluidic experiment where
solution is flowed through the microfluidic
channels as shown by (A) images and (B) an overlay of current time
traces measured at two electrodes in the single fiber containing the
microfluidic channels. Images show the fiber working electrodes above
and the reference/counter electrodes below (dark needle), and each
image is sequentially 50 s apart. Initially, PBS flows through channel
1, and the air between the fiber electrode and reference/counter probe
means no electrical connection. Once the liquid bridges the gap, connection
is made and current flows. Channel 1 is then stopped, and channel
2 flows Fc solution, and a corresponding increase in current is observed
as ferrocene is oxidized on the electrode surfaces. The delay in current
increase arises due to the tubing connecting the fiber and pump and
the fiber length. Differences in the observed current magnitude and
charging currents between electrodes can be explained by fiber variation
due to the inhomogeneous electrode composition, draw process, and
preparation processes.
Fluidic experiment where
solution is flowed through the microfluidic
channels as shown by (A) images and (B) an overlay of current time
traces measured at two electrodes in the single fiber containing the
microfluidic channels. Images show the fiber working electrodes above
and the reference/counter electrodes below (dark needle), and each
image is sequentially 50 s apart. Initially, PBS flows through channel
1, and the air between the fiber electrode and reference/counter probe
means no electrical connection. Once the liquid bridges the gap, connection
is made and current flows. Channel 1 is then stopped, and channel
2 flows Fc solution, and a corresponding increase in current is observed
as ferrocene is oxidized on the electrode surfaces. The delay in current
increase arises due to the tubing connecting the fiber and pump and
the fiber length. Differences in the observed current magnitude and
charging currents between electrodes can be explained by fiber variation
due to the inhomogeneous electrode composition, draw process, and
preparation processes.
Fibers for pH Sensing
For pH sensing, a carbon electrode
was coated with iridium oxide. The application of iridium oxide-based
pH sensors has been studied for over three decades and shows great
potential.[32,33] We tested the pH response in
the physiological range using PBS solutions of varying pH, Figure A. A linear relationship
is observed between the open circuit potential of the iridium oxide-coated
electrode and pH value, within the pH range 5 and 8. The slope of
this line is close to Nernstian behavior, and response is repeatable, Figure B, with similar sensitivities
to literature sensors.[33] The pH sensors
remained stable during experiments with continuous use (1 h). Some
variability is seen between sensors, Figure B, and between sensors on different fibers, Figure S4A; however, repeats with the same sensor
show excellent reproducibility. This demonstrates that the fiber platform
can be used to fabricate pH sensors.
Figure 3
Iridium oxide-coated carbon pH sensor
response to solutions with
pH varying between 5 and 8. (A) Open circuit potential vs time trace
showing a typical signal, where potential is measured vs an Ag|AgCl
reference electrode. (B) pH vs open circuit potential for fabricated
sensors. Three different colored markers represent three different
pH sensors (three different electrodes) within the same fiber, and
open vs filled markers indicate repeats of the same sensor. Averaged
data are fitted using a linear model (dashed line). A consistent change
in potential is observed as the solution is changed.
Iridium oxide-coated carbon pH sensor
response to solutions with
pH varying between 5 and 8. (A) Open circuit potential vs time trace
showing a typical signal, where potential is measured vs an Ag|AgCl
reference electrode. (B) pH vs open circuit potential for fabricated
sensors. Three different colored markers represent three different
pH sensors (three different electrodes) within the same fiber, and
open vs filled markers indicate repeats of the same sensor. Averaged
data are fitted using a linear model (dashed line). A consistent change
in potential is observed as the solution is changed.
Fibers as Lactate Sensors
The amperometric lactate
sensor platform uses lactate oxidase to oxidize lactate, producing
hydrogen peroxide in the process. Hydrogen peroxide is then detected
amperometrically on the electrode surface. As platinum is a better
electrocatalyst for peroxide oxidation than carbon, potentiometry
was used to grow platinum black on the carbon surface. Despite the
whole electrode immersion in solution, platinum black is only grown
on the electrochemically activated surface. This resulted in regional
growth rather than a continuous film, Figure A,B. The resulting cyclic voltammograms (CVs)
show platinum-like oxidation and reduction peaks and an increase in
surface area, Figure D.
Figure 4
SEM images showing a (A) multifunctional fiber surface after platinum
black deposition on one electrode, (B) zoomed-in section of a fiber
with an electrode with platinum black grown, and (C) zoomed-in section
of a fiber with a bare electrode where no potential was applied while
in Pt black growth solution. (D) CVs of two electrodes from a fiber
in sulfuric acid (0.5 M H2SO4, 100 mV s–1 vs Ag|AgCl). A flat response was obtained from the
bare carbon electrode (black line), whereas the characteristic CV
peaks of Pt are seen following platinum black growth (red line).
SEM images showing a (A) multifunctional fiber surface after platinum
black deposition on one electrode, (B) zoomed-in section of a fiber
with an electrode with platinum black grown, and (C) zoomed-in section
of a fiber with a bare electrode where no potential was applied while
in Pt black growth solution. (D) CVs of two electrodes from a fiber
in sulfuric acid (0.5 M H2SO4, 100 mV s–1 vs Ag|AgCl). A flat response was obtained from the
bare carbon electrode (black line), whereas the characteristic CV
peaks of Pt are seen following platinum black growth (red line).A schematic of the lactate sensor is shown in Figure A. After platinum
growth, an
exclusion layer of m-phenylene diamine is grown via
amperometry in order to prevent nonspecific signal. Successful deposition
of the exclusion layer was confirmed by observing a reduced current
and lack of redox peaks with a ferrocene reporter by CV, Figure S2D. The exclusion layer is followed by
dip deposition of a hydrogel layer containing lactate oxidase and
curing. The sensor shows greatly improved lactate detection after
platinum black growth, Figure B, with a sensitivity change from 0.09 ± 0.01 nA/mM to
2.63 ± 0.66 nA/mM (n = 4) for bare carbon and
Pt black-coated, respectively. This improved sensitivity is comparable
to similar lactate sensors reported in the literature.[13,14,34] The limit of detection (LOD)
for our lactate sensor on a Pt black-coated electrode (calculated
as the blank signal plus three times the blank signal) is 19 ±
7 μM (n = 4). Both the sensitivity and LOD
show that the sensor is capable of measuring lactate concentrations
in physiologically relevant ranges.[6,14,35]
Figure 5
(A) Schematic of the lactate electrode biosensor on a
fiber. (B)
Response to lactate of a lactate sensor made from platinum black-coated
electrodes and a nonfunctionalized carbon electrode. Data are fitted
with the Michaelis–Menten equation. Markers represent mean
± standard deviation of repeated measurements (n = 3). (C) Normalized current response for a 0.25 mM lactate step
change vs time on a Pt black-coated electrode in a stirred beaker.
In black is the average response for two sensors (n = 12 step changes), and green represents the standard error. (D)
Response of two lactate sensors to two different analytes: hydrogen
peroxide (in maroon from concentrations 0–5 mM) and lactate
(in green from concentrations 0–3 mM). Sensors 1 and 2 are
located on the same fiber. Data are fitted with the Michaelis–Menten
equation for response to lactate and a linear fit for hydrogen peroxide
response. Markers represent mean ± standard deviation of repeated
measurements (n = 3–4). (E) Current over time
for a lactate sensor after the addition of lactate (two aliquots giving
concentrations of 0.25 mM and then 0.5 mM lactate) and then 0.02 mM
H2O2. Lactate sensors respond to both lactate
and hydrogen peroxide. (F) Current recorded over time for a control
biosensor (no enzyme present) after the addition of lactate (two aliquots
giving concentrations of 0.25 mM and then 0.5 mM lactate), followed
by 0.02 mM hydrogen peroxide. No sensor response is seen with lactate
addition, response is seen with hydrogen peroxide.
(A) Schematic of the lactate electrode biosensor on a
fiber. (B)
Response to lactate of a lactate sensor made from platinum black-coated
electrodes and a nonfunctionalized carbon electrode. Data are fitted
with the Michaelis–Menten equation. Markers represent mean
± standard deviation of repeated measurements (n = 3). (C) Normalized current response for a 0.25 mM lactate step
change vs time on a Pt black-coated electrode in a stirred beaker.
In black is the average response for two sensors (n = 12 step changes), and green represents the standard error. (D)
Response of two lactate sensors to two different analytes: hydrogen
peroxide (in maroon from concentrations 0–5 mM) and lactate
(in green from concentrations 0–3 mM). Sensors 1 and 2 are
located on the same fiber. Data are fitted with the Michaelis–Menten
equation for response to lactate and a linear fit for hydrogen peroxide
response. Markers represent mean ± standard deviation of repeated
measurements (n = 3–4). (E) Current over time
for a lactate sensor after the addition of lactate (two aliquots giving
concentrations of 0.25 mM and then 0.5 mM lactate) and then 0.02 mM
H2O2. Lactate sensors respond to both lactate
and hydrogen peroxide. (F) Current recorded over time for a control
biosensor (no enzyme present) after the addition of lactate (two aliquots
giving concentrations of 0.25 mM and then 0.5 mM lactate), followed
by 0.02 mM hydrogen peroxide. No sensor response is seen with lactate
addition, response is seen with hydrogen peroxide.A small amount of variability is seen in sensor response
both within
the same fiber and between electrodes on different fibers, Figure S4B, likely due to differences in the
underlying electrode surface area and composition. Each sensor response,
however, is highly reproducible. Lactate sensors remained stable over
multiple measurements, with small decreases in sensitivity over time
due to the enzyme component, Figure S5 and
as seen in the literature.[6] Sensor response
to lactate concentration changes is on the order of a few seconds,
indicating that these sensors are capable of measuring rapid transient
concentration changes, Figure C.When acting as a lactate sensor, the electrode is
measuring hydrogen
peroxide concentration as generated by lactate oxidase. Hence, it
is no surprise that lactate sensors are responsive to both lactate
and hydrogen peroxide, Figure D,E. As can be seen in Figure D, response is linear for hydrogen peroxide under conditions
tested (up to 5 mM), while response to lactate reaches a plateau due
to the lactate oxidase enzyme kinetics. Sensitivity to hydrogen peroxide
is 6.14 ± 0.18 nA/mM (n = 2) and is higher than
that to lactate (2.63 ± 0.66 nA/mM) due to the enzyme processes
involved for lactate sensing. For measurement, the sensor is held
at +0.7 V, at which other interferents may be oxidized. Selectivity
of similar sensors with the same barrier layer has been published
elsewhere and shown negligible response to serotonin, dopamine, or
ascorbic acid.[13,28,35,36] To confirm lactate is being measured without
contribution from interferents, however, we fabricated control sensors.
Control sensors (lacking the enzyme component required to detect lactate)
show only a response to hydrogen peroxide and no response to lactate, Figure F.
Fiber with
a pH Sensor and Lactate Sensor for Simultaneous Detection
Electrodes are individually addressable and, hence, can be functionalized
as different sensors within the same fiber. To demonstrate this, we
functionalized one electrode as a potentiometric pH sensor, another
as an amperometric lactate sensor, and a third with no functionalization
to act as a control (bare carbon electrode). Iridium oxide was grown
first, with the Pt black deposition and lactate sensor layers subsequently
added. In preliminary tests, we exposed the fiber to varying pH (pH
6.52 and pH 7.56) and lactate concentration (0.1 and 0.5 mM lactate)
solutions (Figure S4). Each sensor showed
the expected trends, demonstrating that multiplexing with the fiber
can be performed. This is observed by increases in current with lactate,
decreases in potential with pH, and no changes for the control sensor.
However, sensitivities are not in keeping with lactate or pH sensor
calibrations on separate fibers, indicating that the electronics and
methods for fabricating the sensors on the same fiber require optimization.
Areas to consider and optimize include (1) the electronics for simultaneous
potentiometric and amperometric measurement, (2) the processes and
sequence of growth of the layers for each sensor and whether they
affect one another, and (3) the mechanisms of the sensors in tandem,
to be reported elsewhere.
Applying Fiber Biosensors for In Vivo Measurements
We have demonstrated the potential of our fibers to deliver different
fluids, measure fluid changes via electrochemistry, and perform pH
and lactate sensing in vitro. The ideal would be to use all capabilities
of the fibers for in vivo testing; however, first two areas need to
be addressed: (1) improvement in fluidics as the small channel size
can lead to blockages and (2) optimization of multiple sensor fabrication
and measurement within the same fiber. To demonstrate application
of the fibers in vivo, therefore, we chose to use the amperometric
lactate sensor alone. Monitoring transient changes in lactate concentration
can provide vital information about the metabolic health of the brain.
For example, trauma to the brain can give rise to secondary insults
such as SDs, which in turn lead to worse patient outcomes.[37] SDs have been shown to be detrimental to the
injured human brain and are accompanied by a change in concentration
of important neurometabolic chemicals such as glucose, potassium,
and lactate.[6,38]Here, the experiments involved
needle pricks in the frontal cortex of mice to induce SDs. Of interest
was whether the fiber biosensors were sufficiently sensitive to detect
the propagation of the metabolic effects of SDs in a mouse brain,
in particular, whether an area with local tissue damage affected the
observed responses. An overview of the measurements taken for one
experiment is shown in Figure , which shows a bird’s eye view of the mouse brain
corona. A full trace for both animals of the experiments can be found
in Supporting Information, Figures S7 and S8. Lactate sensor stability is predominantly influenced by loss of
enzyme activity. We expect the sensors to remain usable during the
experiment time period (maximum 5 h), confirmed by performing calibrations
before and after implantation.
Figure 6
Continuous monitoring of lactate concentration
in vivo in a mouse
model showing the response of the lactate fiber biosensors to needle
pricks from different locations. (A) Response of a lactate biosensor
after needle pricks (n = 4) in the hole indicated
from the arrow. A similar SD signature of response and delay of response
is observed after each needle prick bar one (flat response); this
is thought to have been an artifact of a missed needle prick, and
a repeat after 10 min yielded the expected resulting signal, Figure S7. (B) No SD signature is observed after
needle pricks in this location in the time frame typically seen with
the other data (∼1.5 min), likely due to the local tissue damage.
(i) Perhaps, a delayed response is seen in two pricks after the 6
min mark as highlighted by the small gray arrows. (C) Broadly similar
pattern is seen after a needle prick in this location (n = 1), although slightly smaller in magnitude. (D) Again, a similar
SD pattern is observed following a needle prick in this location,
despite the presence of local damage near the biosensor. This indicates
that tissue is still able to respond to SDs. All recordings were calibrated
and time aligned to the time when the needle prick was made, represented
by the black dotted line.
Continuous monitoring of lactate concentration
in vivo in a mouse
model showing the response of the lactate fiber biosensors to needle
pricks from different locations. (A) Response of a lactate biosensor
after needle pricks (n = 4) in the hole indicated
from the arrow. A similar SD signature of response and delay of response
is observed after each needle prick bar one (flat response); this
is thought to have been an artifact of a missed needle prick, and
a repeat after 10 min yielded the expected resulting signal, Figure S7. (B) No SD signature is observed after
needle pricks in this location in the time frame typically seen with
the other data (∼1.5 min), likely due to the local tissue damage.
(i) Perhaps, a delayed response is seen in two pricks after the 6
min mark as highlighted by the small gray arrows. (C) Broadly similar
pattern is seen after a needle prick in this location (n = 1), although slightly smaller in magnitude. (D) Again, a similar
SD pattern is observed following a needle prick in this location,
despite the presence of local damage near the biosensor. This indicates
that tissue is still able to respond to SDs. All recordings were calibrated
and time aligned to the time when the needle prick was made, represented
by the black dotted line.In vivo data were collected, showing that monitoring lactate concentration
fluctuations was possible with the developed implanted fibers. What
we believe to be the signature of an SD is observed following the
majority of needle pricks. Meanwhile, in a hemisphere where a local
trauma event had occurred, either a smaller or no such pattern is
observed. It has been shown that ascorbate concentration fluctuates
with SDs.[39] Ascorbate is also electroactive,
and at 0.7 V, it would contribute to an electrochemical signal on
a bare electrode. We do not expect a signal on our barrier-coated
electrode.[28] We performed an in vivo experiment
with a control sensor (lacking the enzyme component required to detect
lactate) which showed no response during measurements, Figures S8A and S9. Following the experiment,
the control sensor showed response to hydrogen peroxide and no response
to lactate (Figure S10), as was observed
in in vitro measurements with control sensors. In vivo results with
the control sensor indicate that the observed response of the lactate
sensors is indeed due to changes in neural lactate rather than the
presence of other electroactive species such as ascorbate. In addition,
this confirms that the exclusion layer of the sensor is successful
in reducing interferents.Focusing on experiment 1, the data
show a time delay of 67 ±
7 s (n = 4 transients) between the needle prick and
the change in lactate concentration, indicating that the speed of
the SD wave is ∼2.7 mm/min, comparable to other reports of
SD wave speeds.[8,40] The profile for the change in
lactate concentration following the needle prick is biphasic (a decrease
in lactate followed by an increase). The initial decrease in concentration
is likely because of the immediate energy demand following an SD,
where neurons preferentially utilize lactate fuel[41] in the presence of oxygen, to recover function. This has
previously been found when the overall extracellular lactate levels
are high.[42] The subsequent increase in
local lactate concentration could indicate ischemic conditions leading
to anaerobic metabolism, or in response to glutamate uptake, the neurons
release lactate. The observed increase in lactate concentration is
in keeping with the current understanding of changes in the brain
during SDs measured via rsMD[6] and electrochemical
biosensors.[13,34] Further discussion on lactate
use or relevance in the brain is beyond the scope of this work, as
instead we highlight the value of real-time monitoring of lactate
concentration changes.Within a short time frame (<2 min),
no change in lactate is
observed when a local trauma zone is positioned between the needle
prick point and the biosensor, suggesting that the physical damage
affects either the movement of SDs or that the repolarization capability
of the local tissue is impaired. The difference in response at different
tissue locations proves that the effects measured are local effects
and not general global changes in lactate concentrations. It may indicate
that the path of SDs can change due to the presence of localized damage,
as discussed by Nakamura, Graf, et al.[43] However, because only two experiments were performed and there is
variation within the biosensor and animal response, this cannot be
statistically verified. We note that these flexible fibers with lactate
biosensors successfully monitor local concentration changes in in
vivo lactate, demonstrating, for the first time, their potential as
directly implantable biosensors.
Conclusions
We
applied flexible polymer fibers containing multiple graphite-doped
electrodes and microfluidic channels to create electrochemical biosensors
for pH and lactate. Changes in neural lactate were detectable in vivo.Initially, the electrochemical behavior of the fiber electrodes
was investigated. This was then coupled with flowing electroactive
and buffer solutions through the microfluidic channels while being
monitored amperometrically with fiber electrodes. The preliminary
data demonstrate a potential use by coupling the fluidic component
with electrochemical measurements at the electrodes; with development
one could perfuse and measure a compound of interest at the fiber
surface. Potentiometric sensors were demonstrated by making the electrodes
responsive to pH, demonstrating a possible use of electrodes as sensors.
Amperometric lactate sensors were developed and shown to respond to
lactate concentration in vitro. Variability between electrodes/sensors
on the same fiber and across fibers have been examined for bare electrodes
(Figure S2A–C), pH sensors (Figure S4A), and lactate sensors (Figure S4B), showing adequate reproducibility.
Preliminary experiments with a pH and lactate sensor within the same
fiber were performed, demonstrating multiplexing capability. Lactate
sensors were then translated in vivo, where they were used to monitor
the change in local lactate concentration in response to SDs following
brain needle pricks in a mouse model, supported by no response observed
in control sensors. A number of needle pricks resulted in repeatable
signatures of response which we attribute to SDs. When local tissue
damage was present, the response was shown to change from what was
previously observed, suggesting that local changes may be monitored
using the fiber biosensors. In vivo application demonstrates the potential
of flexible fibers for making implantable biosensors.Future
directions are aimed at miniaturizing the fiber and including
local field potential (LFP) measurements at one of the electrode contacts.[44] LFP measurements allow confirmation of the timing
of a passing SD wave. This capability will complement lactate sensing
and confirm that the observed lactate changes are from passing SDs.
Investigation of in vivo pH sensing will also be performed, to be
reported elsewhere. Furthermore, future directions involve experiments
that encompass the multifunctionality and multiplexing capability
of the fibers by making each electrode into a different sensor and
by the delivery of drugs of interest, for example, dexamethasone,
to reduce penetration injury during implantation.[8] These experiments will require optimization of sensors
within the same fiber and improvement in fluidics, as the small microfluidic
channels are subject to blocking. Once larger and robust microfluidic
channels are included, we believe solution perfusion will be possible
even with the added sensor layers such as the lactate sensor hydrogel
layer, based on our experiments on similar, larger devices (data not
shown). The next stage is hence to optimize and then use the full
capabilities of these fibers and carry out multimodal analysis.
Authors: Marsilea A Booth; Sally A N Gowers; Chi Leng Leong; Michelle L Rogers; Isabelle C Samper; Aidan P Wickham; Martyn G Boutelle Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Woong Hee Lee; Thitaphat Ngernsutivorakul; Omar S Mabrouk; Jenny-Marie T Wong; Colleen E Dugan; Samuel S Pappas; Hyeun Joong Yoon; Robert T Kennedy Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2016-01-04 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Aya Abdalla; Christopher W Atcherley; Pavithra Pathirathna; Srimal Samaranayake; Beidi Qiang; Edsel Peña; Stephen L Morgan; Michael L Heien; Parastoo Hashemi Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2017-09-07 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Charles Chatard; Andrei Sabac; Laura Moreno-Velasquez; Anne Meiller; Stephane Marinesco Journal: ACS Cent Sci Date: 2018-12-14 Impact factor: 14.553
Authors: Helen E Parker; Sanghamitra Sengupta; Achar V Harish; Ruben R G Soares; Haakan N Joensson; Walter Margulis; Aman Russom; Fredrik Laurell Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-03-03 Impact factor: 4.379