Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-lqwgf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-31T19:09:44.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Recent advances of in situ and in vivo electrochemical analysis of brain chemistry at micro- and nanoscale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 May 2026

Jinger Chen
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs, School of Pharmaceutical Science, Beijing Key Laboratory of Carbohydrate Intelligent Manufacture and Functional Applications, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
Lijiao Cao
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs, School of Pharmaceutical Science, Beijing Key Laboratory of Carbohydrate Intelligent Manufacture and Functional Applications, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
Yuying Liu
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs, School of Pharmaceutical Science, Beijing Key Laboratory of Carbohydrate Intelligent Manufacture and Functional Applications, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
Junlan Zhou
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs, School of Pharmaceutical Science, Beijing Key Laboratory of Carbohydrate Intelligent Manufacture and Functional Applications, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
Xiaoke Nan
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs, School of Pharmaceutical Science, Beijing Key Laboratory of Carbohydrate Intelligent Manufacture and Functional Applications, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
Chuqi Li
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs, School of Pharmaceutical Science, Beijing Key Laboratory of Carbohydrate Intelligent Manufacture and Functional Applications, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
Meiping Xiong
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs, School of Pharmaceutical Science, Beijing Key Laboratory of Carbohydrate Intelligent Manufacture and Functional Applications, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
Chao Yuan*
Affiliation:
Department of Preventive Dentistry, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, National Center for Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Beijing 100081, China
Xianchan Li*
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs, School of Pharmaceutical Science, Beijing Key Laboratory of Carbohydrate Intelligent Manufacture and Functional Applications, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China Department of Preventive Dentistry, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, National Center for Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Beijing 100081, China
*
Corresponding authors: Xianchan Li and Chao Yuan, Emails: xcli@pku.edu.cn; chaoyuan@bjmu.edu.cn
Corresponding authors: Xianchan Li and Chao Yuan, Emails: xcli@pku.edu.cn; chaoyuan@bjmu.edu.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Real-time, in situ monitoring of neurochemical dynamics in intact neural circuits is critical for elucidating brain function. Recent innovations in micro- and nanoelectrode engineering have markedly advanced our ability to detect neurotransmitter and neuromodulator release with high spatiotemporal resolution, while the application of machine learning (ML) has facilitated the development of next-generation electrodes and enhanced signal processing capabilities. Here, we outline a vision for the potential directions for electrode interface design and the deepening integration of ML in in situ neurochemical sensing, illustrating how breakthroughs over the past decade have illuminated these opportunities.

Information

Type
Perspective
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that no alterations are made and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press or the rights holder(s) must be obtained prior to any commercial use and/or adaptation of the article.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. SVE quantifies vesicular neurotransmitter content and release dynamics. (a) Typical image, schematic diagram, and amperometric traces of SCA and IVIEC quantifying octopamine molecules at neuromuscular varicosities. Overlaid traces compare exocytotic events recorded by SCA (black) with mathematically modeled fusion pore radius variations (red), revealing release mode–dependent differences. Reprinted from Larsson et al. (2020) with permission from Wiley. (b) Schematic diagram and typical traces of vesicular neurotransmitter content in midbrain organoids derived from a control iPSC line (H9) and a young-onset Parkinson’s disease (YOPD) patient iPSC line (PD52). Histograms show normalized frequency distributions of vesicle dopamine (DA) content, average DA molecules per vesicle, and event counts. Reprinted from Zhu et al. (2022) with permission from Royal Society of Chemistry. (c) Schematic of an SVE platform combining IVIEC and SCA for measuring vesicular neurotransmitter storage and exocytotic release in soma and varicosities in fresh brain slices. Representative current–time (i–t) traces of IVIEC and SCA in somas of the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc) are shown, with insets displaying magnified asterisk-marked spikes (*). Reprinted from Liu et al. (2025) with permission from American Chemical Society.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Nanostructured electrode modifications enable quantitative intracellular analysis of neurochemicals. (a) Fabrication and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of Pt/GluOx-modified SiC@C nanowire electrodes. Depending on the placement, these nanoelectrodes enable amperometric monitoring of Glu exocytotic release from single varicosities (I) or vesicular Glu content by IVIEC (II) in a hippocampal neuron. Reprinted from Yang et al. (2021) with permission from Wiley. (b) Ultrafast Glu sensor modified with AuNPs (red hemispheres) and a thin GluOx coating (yellow hemispheres) enables monitoring vesicle rupture and release of Glu at the sensor surface. Typical amperometric trace and an illustration of six different current spike types associated with Glu release in the nucleus accumbens of a brain slice. Reprinted from Wang et al. (2019a) with permission from American Chemical Society. (c) The fabrication process of SiC@Pt nanowire electrode and its application for quantitative monitoring of freshly produced ROS/RNS in individual phagolysosomes during a single IVIEC event. Reprinted from Qi et al. (2022) with permission from American Chemical Society. (d) Characterization of PEDOT/PB/CFNE electrodes, including SEM, cyclic voltammograms, sensitivity, stability, and selectivity. Experimental setup for detecting H2O2 using PEDOT/PB/CFNE upon following MPP+ injection, along with a representative amperometric response obtained in SH-SY5Y cells. Reprinted from Zhang et al. (2023) with permission from Wiley.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Modified CFEs and aptamer-based sensors enable selective in vivo monitoring of AA, DA, and 5-HT. (a) Selective monitoring of AA in the rat cortex using the CFEAA2.0 sensor. Current responses are shown following local microinjection of artificial cerebrospinal fluid (aCSF) and 500 μM NMDA at applied potentials of +50 mV and − 120 mV, respectively. Reprinted from Jin et al. (2020) with permission from American Chemical Society. (b) Schematic illustration of TpPa covalent organic framework (COF) growth on CFEs, showing pore structure and SEM images of bare and COF-modified CFE. Integration with a closed-loop feedback system enables diagnosis and therapeutic intervention for PD. Reprinted from Zhou et al. (2023) with permission from American Chemical Society. (c) Two-step DA-mediated electrochemical conjugation strategy got aptamer-functionalized DA sensor (aptCFEDA2.0). Typical amperometric responses and calibration curves in response to successive DA additions in aCSF, both pre- and post-12-h in vivo implantation in the striatum, along with real-time DA sensing upon localized KCl or aCSF injection (2 μL min−1 for 30 s). Reprinted from Li et al. (2022) with permission from Wiley. (d) Phosphorothioate aptamer–based galvanic redox potentiometric sensor (aptGRP5-HT) for 5-HT detection. Potential responses toward successive 5-HT additions in aCSF and illustration of in vivo monitoring of 5-HT in the rodent brain are presented. Reprinted from Zhu et al. (2025) with permission from Wiley. (e) Schematic diagram of inflammation-free in vivo electrochemical sensing using Fe1/NC-modified CFEs. Experimental results demonstrate the anti-inflammatory properties of the modified electrodes. Reprinted from Gao et al. (2024) with permission from Springer Nature.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Integrated electrophysiological and neurochemical sensors for real-time in vivo monitoring of neuronal activity and neurochemicals. (a) Simultaneous measurement of single-unit action potentials and DA release following medial forebrain bundle stimulation. DA levels were monitored with a CFME in the nucleus accumbens, while spike recording was performed in the contralateral hippocampus. Raster plots and peri-event histograms of neuronal responses, average DA concentration changes with characteristic voltammograms, and false-color time–voltage current plots were shown. Reprinted from Parent et al. (2017) with permission from American Chemical Society. (b) Conceptual schematic and circuit block diagram of a dual-mode device enabling co-recording of electrophysiological and electrochemical signals. Reprinted from Mulberry et al. (2023) with permission from MDPI. (c) Implantable microelectrode array (MEA) probe fabricated using silicon-on-insulator (SOI) substrates via microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) technology. Typical recordings illustrate signal distributions from three brain regions in both healthy and PD monkeys. Reprinted from Zhang et al. (2018) with permission from Springer Nature.

Figure 4

Figure 5. ML-driven frameworks for material property prediction and structure–function analysis in nanoscale systems. (a) Schematic overview of the ML process flow, from sensing and data collection to model-based prediction and application. Reprinted from Bhaiyya et al. (2024) with permission from American Chemical Society. (b) Accelerated mapping of electronic density-of-states patterns of metallic nanoparticles via ML-based modeling. Reprinted from Bhaiyya et al. (2021) with permission from Springer Nature. (c) BE-CGCNN model accelerates the construction of Pourbaix diagrams, enabling the exploration of electrochemical stability over various NP sizes and shapes. Reprinted from Bang et al. (2023) with permission from Springer Nature.

Figure 5

Figure 6. ML enables automated voltammetric classification, drift correction, peak deconvolution, and integrated in vitro–in vivo signal analysis. (a) The bijective relationship between molecular electrochemical mechanisms and cyclic voltammograms. Comparison between manual inspection and automated classification and the function and proposed benefits of a deep learning algorithm trained on five molecular electrochemical mechanisms modeled by partial differential equations. Reprinted from Hoar et al. (2022) with permission from American Chemical Society. (b) FSCV data preprocessing using dual-waveform partial least squares regression (DW-PLSR). Color plots show raw signals, model-predicted drift, and drift-subtracted signals. FSCVs compare DW-PLSR and conventional background subtraction at the time of adenosine injection and current–time traces at the primary (+1.35 V) and secondary (+1.05 V) adenosine oxidation potentials. Insets show adenosine-induced fluctuations. Reprinted from Meunier et al. (2019) with permission from American Chemical Society. (c) One-dimensional convolutional neural network (1D-CNN) trained on simulated and experimental voltammetric data, enabling accurate deconvolution of overlapping electrochemical peaks. Reprinted from Ciepiela et al. (2025) with permission from Elsevier. (d) Schematic of the deep learning–based voltammetric (DLV) sensing platform and representative deconvolution of in vitro voltammograms using the DLV model. Reprinted from Xue et al. (2021) with permission from Wiley. (e) Methodological workflow of the CIGNN-based in vivo voltammetric analysis, comprising in vivo experiments (Step I), generative deep learning–assisted data processing (Step II), and quantitative analysis (Step III) and diagram of the CIGNN model architecture used to predict the non-Faradaic component of background-subtracted data. Reprinted from Li et al. (2025) with permission from American Chemical Society.

Author comment: Recent advances of in situ and in vivo electrochemical analysis of brain chemistry at micro- and nanoscale — R0/PR1

Comments

Dear Professor Phan,

Thanks for your invitation of contributing to the special issue of on Nanoscale Analysis of Brain Chemistry and Structure. We would like to submit the attached perspective “Recent Advances of In-Situ and In-Vivo Electrochemical Analysis of Brain Chemistry at Micro- and Nano-Scale” to Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery. This work is original, unpublished, and is not considered for publication elsewhere. I hope you find it interesting for the Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery. We think this will be extremely important as there is a large interest in this area now and a lot of arguments!

In this study, we provide a concise review of recent advances in electrochemical analysis of brain chemicals. First, novel electrochemical techniques, including tailored electrode modifications have achieved unprecedented spatiotemporal resolution for in vivo and in situ detection of neurotransmitters and neuromodulators. At the same time, hybrid electrophysiology-electrochemistry approaches now allow simultaneous monitoring of neural activity and chemical signaling. Reflecting these trends, machine learning (ML) methods are increasingly applied to brain chemical analysis: ML not only accelerates electrode interface design but also effectively removes background noise and corrects for interference in high throughput neurochemical recordings, thereby boosting processing speed and quantitative accuracy. Building on this momentum, we propose a series of forward‑looking perspectives that span three key areas: biofouling‑resistant electrode coatings; microfluidic platforms integrating multiple electrochemical methods to generate multidimensional fingerprints; and machine‑learning–driven workflows that accelerate throughput and manage large datasets in real time. We are confident that our perspectives resonate with the Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery’s mission to focus on bold, hypothesis driven insights and new findings, advance the frontiers of biophysics, and ignite breakthroughs across disciplines.

Thank you in advance for your consideration and looking forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Xianchan Li, Ph. D.

Assistant Professor

State Key Laboratory of Natural and Biomimetic Drugs

School of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Peking University

E-mail: xcli@pku.edu.cn

Review: Recent advances of in situ and in vivo electrochemical analysis of brain chemistry at micro- and nanoscale — R0/PR2

Conflict of interest statement

no

Comments

This manuscript provides a timely and well-structured overview of recent progress in micro- and nanoscale electrochemical strategies for monitoring brain chemistry in situ and in vivo. It highlights important advances in single-vesicle electrochemistry, detection of both electroactive and non-electroactive neurochemicals, multimodal sensing platforms integrating electrophysiology with electrochemistry, and the application of machine learning to electrode interface design and real-time signal processing. Importantly, the authors propose a forward-looking framework that bridges nanofabrication, intelligent computation, and neurochemical sensing, pointing toward high-resolution, long-term, multiplexed monitoring in complex neural environments. The integration of fundamental neurochemistry with engineering and data science concepts is a notable strength of this work. The manuscript is clearly written and well organized, and therefore merits publication following minor revision. Some minor questions and suggestions for improvement are listed below.

1. The perspective should discuss electrode surface chemistry in more detail. How are micro/nano-electrodes functionalized to achieve selectivity for specific brain analytes? For example, enzyme coatings or polymer films can improve neurotransmitter selectivity.

2. The discussion of neurotransmitter detection omits mention of major interferents. Compounds like ascorbic acid (AA) and uric acid (UA) are abundant in brain tissue and can be oxidized at similar potentials to neurotransmitters. Please address how micro/nano electrodes manage interference.

3. The description of ITIES-based acetylcholine sensing (p. 20) omits critical details of ion transfer energetics and selectivity. Without such discussion, non-specialists might not understand how the ITIES approach achieves discrimination between ACh and other quaternary ammonium species.

4. When introducing dual-function Fe single-atom catalysts (Fe SACs) for anti-inflammatory sensing, the text notes their “remarkable antioxidative enzyme-mimicking properties” but does not quantify catalytic performance (e.g., turnover frequency for ROS scavenging, % reduction in ROS during implantation). Including quantitative data from the original studies would strengthen the claim.

5. The in vivo AA monitoring section describes novel sensors but does not mention that AA concentration changes can reflect oxidative stress levels in neurodegenerative diseases. Including such context would strengthen the biological relevance.

6. The terms in situ and in vivo are used somewhat interchangeably. Please clarify their meanings. For instance, in situ might mean within brain slices or tissue preparations, whereas in vivo refers to living animals. Ensure that each use is correct and consistent.

7. The perspective could be strengthened by highlighting potential applications in neuroscience and medicine. For example, how might these advances aid in studying diseases like Parkinson’s or enable brain–machine interfaces?

Review: Recent advances of in situ and in vivo electrochemical analysis of brain chemistry at micro- and nanoscale — R0/PR3

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

The manuscript describes real-time, in situ monitoring of neurochemical dynamics within intact neural circuits. The authors summarize recent advances in micro- and nanoelectrode to detect neurotransmitter and neuromodulator release with high spatiotemporal resolution. In this perspective, the authors present a vision on the design of advanced electrode interfaces and the growing role of machine learning in in situ and in vivo neurochemical sensing. Overall, the manuscript is clearly written, well-structured, and of broad interest to the field. I recommend publication after minor revision. The authors are suggested to discuss model validation in the section of machine learning.

1. In this perspective, the authors describe several nanomaterials including graphene, carbon nanotubes, conductive polymers. A more comprehensive contribution of these nanomaterials in terms of improving sensitivity, selectivity, or biocompatibility of electrochemical sensors is suggested to summarize.

2. A table including different electrochemical methods (e.g., FSCV, amperometry, IVIEC, aptamer-based sensors) in terms of resolution, analytes, advantages, and limitations is suggested to add.

3. Among different methods such as microdialysis, optical sensors, mass spectrometry, why do researchers choose electrochemistry? The authors are suggested to clarify the advantages of electrochemical method over other methods in this perspective.

4. How do chronic implantation challenges (fouling, gliosis, mechanical mismatch) affect the long-term utility of electrochemical sensors?

5. Most of the references in this perspective come from the authors’ group and close collaborators. They authors are encouraged to add more representative contributions from other international groups (e.g., Venton’s work on 3D-printed electrodes and multimodal monitoring, Ewing’s recent advances in vesicle-stress granule electrochemistry).

6. In this perspective, the authors are encouraged to emphasize their unique viewpoints and propose future research directions.

Recommendation: Recent advances of in situ and in vivo electrochemical analysis of brain chemistry at micro- and nanoscale — R0/PR4

Comments

Ecellent set of comments. Please address them all in your resubmission.

Decision: Recent advances of in situ and in vivo electrochemical analysis of brain chemistry at micro- and nanoscale — R0/PR5

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: Recent advances of in situ and in vivo electrochemical analysis of brain chemistry at micro- and nanoscale — R1/PR6

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Recommendation: Recent advances of in situ and in vivo electrochemical analysis of brain chemistry at micro- and nanoscale — R1/PR7

Comments

The authors have done an excellent job of addressing all the reviewer’s comments. This is now ready for publication.

Decision: Recent advances of in situ and in vivo electrochemical analysis of brain chemistry at micro- and nanoscale — R1/PR8

Comments

No accompanying comment.