Significance
Intracortical microelectrodes can record neuronal action potentials at a resolution necessary for the precise control of Brain-Machine Interface systems (BMIs). However, intracortical microelectrodes have a demonstrated history of progressive declines in the recording performance with time, inhibiting their usefulness. One major contributor to the decline in these devices is the neuroinflammatory response against the implanted microelectrodes. Historically, neuroinflammation to implanted microelectrode arrays has been characterized by histological imaging of relatively few known cellular and protein markers. Few studies have begun to develop a more in-depth understanding of the molecular pathways facilitating device-mediated neuroinflammation. Here, we are among the first to identify genetic pathways that could represent targets to improve the host response to intracortical microelectrodes, and ultimately device performance.
Statement of significance
Intracortical microelectrodes can record neuronal action potentials at a resolution necessary for the precise control of Brain-Machine Interface systems (BMIs). However, intracortical microelectrodes have a demonstrated history of progressive declines in the recording performance with time, inhibiting their usefulness. One major contributor to the decline in these devices is the neuroinflammatory response against the implanted microelectrodes. Historically, neuroinflammation to implanted microelectrode arrays has been characterized by histological imaging of relatively few known cellular and protein markers. Few studies have begun to develop a more in-depth understanding of the molecular pathways facilitating device-mediated neuroinflammation. Here, we are among the first to identify genetic pathways that could represent targets to improve the host response to intracortical microelectrodes, and ultimately device performance.