Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:11:13.127Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Nanocomposites for Neural Interfaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Tanja Kmecko
Affiliation:
tkmekco@msn.com, Zyvex Corporation, Richardson, Tx, 75081, United States
Gareth Hughes
Affiliation:
ghughes@zyvex.com, Zyvex Corporation, Richardson, Tx, 75081, United States
Larry Cauller
Affiliation:
lcauller@utdallas.edu, University of Texas at Dallas, School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Richardson, Tx, 75083, United States
Jeong-Bong Lee
Affiliation:
jblee@utdallas.edu, University of Texas at Dallas, Erik Jonsson School of Engineering and Computer Science, Richardson, Texas, 75083, United States
Mario Romero-Ortega
Affiliation:
mario.romero@tsrh.org, Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children, Division of Regenerative Neurobiology, Dallas, Tx, 75219, United States
Get access

Abstract

We have fabricated micro-probes consisting of gold microelectrode sites (500 μm long and 12 μm wide) modified with conductive polymers and carbon nanotubes to achieve intimate contact with the nervous system. The fabrication process includes photolithography, electroplating and micromachining techniques. In order to obtain a high quality neural contact, we have investigated the preparation and characterization of neural interface materials. Electrochemical polymerization using potentiostatic and galvanostatic methods was used to optimize the surface of the metal electrode sites. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM), cyclic voltammetry (CV), and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) were used to study the surface morphology, electrochemical properties, and stability of electrodeposited polymers. Cytotoxicity tests using fibroblasts and Schwann cells were performed to evaluate the biocompatibility of the micro-probes and neural interface materials. Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) in vitro preparation was used to evaluate neuronal cell cell adhesion to the electrode. Polypyrrole (PPy) and poly(3,4-ethylendioxythiophene) (EDOT) with various thicknesses and dopants were deposited onto microelectrode sites from aqueous solution. Our results demonstrate that we can control the morphology, size and electrical properties of PPy and PEDOT by changing the polymerization conditions and adding dopant structures, such as chloride and carbon nanotubes (CNT). It was observed that the addition of carbon nanotubes favors the formation of nodules and increases the surface roughness. Also, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy revealed that conductive polymer composites lower the impedance of gold microelectrodes by three orders of magnitude. We found that PPy and PEDOT carbon nanotubes composite coated electrodes maintain intimate contact with axons. Using these conductive polymer composites, high quality nerve spike signals can be detected and electrical stimulation of axons can be achieved.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Shastri, V. R., and Pishko, M. V., in Electrical and Optical Polymer System, edited by Wise, D. L., Wnek, G. E., Trantolo, D. J., Copper, T. M., and Gresser, J. D. (Marcel Dekker, Inc., Ney York, 1998), p.1031.Google Scholar
2. Wallace, G. G., Spinks, G. M., Kane-Maguire, L. A. P. and Teasdale, P. R., in Conductive Electroactive Polymers, 2nd ed., (CRC Press LLC, Florida, 2002).Google Scholar
3. Cui, X. and Martin, D. C., Sensors and Actuators B, 89, 92 (2003).Google Scholar
4. Fou, A. C. and Rubner, M. F., Macromolecules, 28, 7115 (1995).Google Scholar
5. Willicut, R. J. and McCarley, R. L., J. Am. Chem. Soc., 116, 10823 (1994).Google Scholar
6. Ramasubramaniam, R. et al., Appl. Phys. Lett., 83, 2928 (2003).Google Scholar
7. Sandler, J., Schaffer, M., Prasse, T., Bauhofer, W., Schulte, K. and Windle, A. H., Polymer, 40, 5967 (1999).Google Scholar
8. Wei, C. Y., Srivastava, C. and Cho, K. J., Nano Lett., 2, 647 (2002).Google Scholar
9. Hughes, M., Chen, G. Z., Shaffer, M. S. P., Fray, D. J. and Windle, A. H., Chem. Mater., 14, 1610 (2002).Google Scholar
10. Xiao, W. F. and Zhou, X., Electrochim. Acta, 48, 575 (2003).Google Scholar
11. Liu, C-Y, Bard, A. J., Wudi, F., Weitz, I. and Heath, J. R., Electrochem. Solid-State Lett., 2 (11), 557 (1999).Google Scholar
12. Frackowiak, E. and Jurewicz, K., Mol. Cyst. Liq. Cryst., 387, [297]/73 (2002).Google Scholar
13. Wu, C-G., Chiang, S-C. and Wu, C-H, Langmuir, 18, 7473 (2002).Google Scholar