Bioelectronic Medicine and Neural Interfaces for Treating Neurological Disorders in Biomedical Engineering
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/mw2024521Keywords:
Bioelectronic medicine, neural interfaces, neurological disorders, vagus nerve stimulation, deep brain stimulationAbstract
Neurological diseases can be treated in a whole new way with bioelectronic medicine, which uses neural connections to directly communicate with the nervous system. This field blends neuroscience, engineering, and clinical practice to make gadgets that can change nerve activity with a level of accuracy that has never been seen before. Recent progress in biomedical engineering has made it possible to create very complex neural connections that can record and trigger activity in neurones at the very small scale. For many neurological conditions, like Parkinson's disease, epilepsy, and chronic pain, these gadgets show promise as new ways to treat them. Traditionally, these conditions have been hard to control with medicine alone. Electrical activation of nerves to repair or change brain function is what bioelectronic medicine is all about. One example is vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), which has become a useful way to help people with refractory epilepsy and depression. This shows that neural interfaces can have big practical effects. Deep brain stimulation (DBS), which uses electrical signals to target specific parts of the brain, has also made a huge difference in the movement ability of people with Parkinson's disease. Adding bioelectronics to real-time data analytics and machine learning methods is also making it possible for treatments that can change based on the brain state of the patient? This personalized method not only makes treatments work better but also cuts down on side effects, which is a big change from the old way of doing things where one answer fits all. Biocompatibility of implanted devices, long-term security of neural interfaces, and ethical concerns about device placement and brain editing are some of the problems that this field is facing as it changes quickly. These problems are still being studied and tested in humans, with the goal of creating better, more successful, and less invasive solutions.
References
Li, X.; Song, Y.; Xiao, G.; He, E.; Xie, J.; Dai, Y.; Xing, Y.; Wang, Y.; Xu, S.; Wang, M.; et al. PDMS-parylene hybrid, flexible micro-ECoG electrode array for spatiotemporal mapping of epileptic electrophysiological activity from multicortical brain regions. ACS Appl. Bio Mater. 2021, 4, 8013–8022.
Song, E.; Li, J.; Won, S.M.; Bai, W.; Rogers, J.A. Materials for flexible bioelectronic systems as chronic neural interfaces. Nat. Mater. 2020, 19, 590–603
Donoghue, J.P. Bridging the brain to the world: A perspective on neural interface systems. Neuron 2008, 60, 511–521.
Yan, R.; Park, J.-H.; Choi, Y.; Heo, C.-J.; Yang, S.-M.; Lee, L.P.; Yang, P. Nanowire-based single-cell endoscopy. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2012, 7, 191–196.
Veronica, A.; Li, Y.; Hsing, I. Minimally invasive & long-lasting neural probes from a materials perspective. Electroanalysis 2019, 31, 586–602.
Donoghue, J.P. Connecting cortex to machines: Recent advances in brain interfaces. Nat. Neurosci. 2002, 5, 1085–1088.
Wellman, S.M.; Eles, J.R.; Ludwig, K.A.; Seymour, J.P.; Michelson, N.J.; McFadden, W.E.; Vazquez, A.L.; Kozai, D.Y.A. Materials roadmap to functional neural interface design. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 28, 1701269.
Vomero, M.; Castagnola, E.; Ciarpella, F.; Maggiolini, E.; Goshi, N.; Zucchini, E.; Carli, S.; Fadiga, L.; Kassegne, S.; Ricci, D. Highly stable glassy carbon interfaces for long-term neural stimulation and low-noise recording of brain activity. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 40332.
Dr. S. T. Shirkande, Dhotre Priti Nagnath, Katkar Akanksha Ganesh, Sapkal Vaishnavi Santosh, Shelar Tanuja Sunil. (2024). Comprehensive Survey on Healthcare Virtual Assistants: Leveraging Natural Language Processing for Predictive Insights. International Journal on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering, 13(2), 41-46.
Sheng, X.; Qin, Z.; Xu, H.; Shu, X.; Gu, G.; Zhu, X. Soft ionic hydrogel electrodes for electroencephalography signal recording. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 2021, 64, 273–282.
Lopez-Gordo, M.A.; Sanchez-Morillo, D.; Valle, F.P. Dry EEG electrodes. Sensors 2014, 14, 12847–12870.
Li, G.L.; Wu, J.-T.; Xia, Y.H.; He, Q.G.; Jin, H.G. Review of semi-dry electrodes for EEG recording. J. Neural Eng. 2020, 17, 051004.
Polikov, V.S.; Tresco, P.A.; Reichert, W.M. Response of brain tissue to chronically implanted neural electrodes. J. Neurosci. Methods 2005, 148, 1–18.
Oldroyd, P.; Malliaras, G.G. Achieving long-term stability of thin-film electrodes for neurostimulation. Acta Biomater. 2022, 139, 65–81.
LaRocco, J.; Le, M.D.; Paeng, D.G. A systemic review of available low-cost EEG headsets used for drowsiness detection. Front. Neuroinform. 2020, 14, 553352.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Shriya Mahajan, Dharmsheel Shrivastava, Malathi.H, Kunal Meher, Lulup Kumar Sahoo, Pochampalli Deepthi, Abhinav Mishra (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
