A stretchable conductor typically consists of two components: an elastomeric insulator and an electrical conductor. There are several approaches to producing stretchable and electrical conducting materials that fall into two categories: structural design and material innovation.
The first time the term stretchable multielectrode array (sMEA)
Understanding how cells convert mechanical stimuli appeared in the literature was in a conference proceeding in 2002 from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.12 This paper described the fabrication of an sMEA for a retinal prosthesis, but no biological material was used, i.e., functionality to record or stimulate neural activity was not attempted. The first description of sMEAs being used to record neural activity in biological samples was in 2006 when the research group of Barclay Morrison at Columbia University and Sigurd Wagner at Princeton University reported recording of spontaneous activity in organotypic hippocampal tissue slices.13 Neither the electrodes nor the tissue appears to have been stretched in these experiments. In 2008, a paper from the Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University described the use of sMEAs in stimulating a explant of a rat spinal cord.14 The sMEA was wrapped around the spinal cord, but not stretched, and the cells were electrically stimulated but not used in recording electrophysiological activity. In 2009, another paper of the Morrison/Wagner groups described for the first time the use of an sMEA with a biological sample being stretched as well as electrical stimulation and recording of electrophysiological activity being carried out before and after stretching.15
In subsequent years, the number of research papers that describes different approaches to fabricating sMEAs and their use for in vitro and in vivo research has increased immensely.
Stretchable microelectrode arrays (sMEAs) can be categorized whether they are used with cells or tissue slices in a dish (in vitro) or whether they are implanted in an animal or human (in vivo).
sMEAs are used in vitro to record and stimulate electrophysiological activity in dissociated cells, tissue slices or organoids. In vitro use of sMEAs may include stretching of the cells. The cells are either harvested from an animal or were derived from human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs).
The form factor of sMEAs is often similar to rigid MEAs because the same data acquisition systems can be used for both types of MEAs. The main differences between sMEAs and rigid MEAs are summarized below:
The reason for these differences is that sMEAs are fabricated using soft elastomeric materials such as PDMS as substrate and encapsulation which have a much higher coefficient of thermal expansion and lower Young's Modulus than rigid MEAs that are built on glass, plastic or silicon (CMOS) substrates. These properties make it more challenging to align and bond small features. In addition, the maximum strain that the electrodes can tolerate decreases for narrower electrodes, which is why the electrodes leads are often wide, thus limiting the number electrodes.16 sMEAs for in vitro applications are only available commercially from BioMedical Sustainable Elastic Electronic Devices.17
There are several benefits of using soft and stretchable MEAs instead of traditional rigid or merely flexible MEAs. With traditional MEAs, the cells are grown on a rigid substrate material such as glass or plastic. This environment is very different from the natural environment of the cells in the body, which causes the cells to behave differently in vitro than in their natural environment in vivo. This is a major issue for the use of rigid MEAs for pre-clinical research because the goal of pre-clinical research is to predict treatment outcomes in humans. The advantages of using sMEAs for pre-clinical research are twofold. First, the stiffness of the substrate that the cells are grown on matches more closely the stiffness of the cellular environment in the body. Second, sMEAs enable the application of biomechanical cues to the cells, which affect cellular function and behavior. Both of these advantages reduce the mismatch of the environment of cells in vitro and in human body, i.e., the cells behave more similarly in vitro as they do in vivo, which improves the value of pre-clinical research to predict clinical outcomes, thus potentially reducing the failure rate of clinical trials (now >95%).
The main disadvantage of sMEAs compared to rigid MEAs are related to the different technologies that are used to manufacture these devices. sMEAs have usually up to 60 electrodes with diameters of between 50μm and 100μm where rigid CMOS based MEAs can have thousands of electrodes with diameters of 10μm. This means that sMEAs are not suitable for studying sub-cellular structures.
Stretchable MEAs have many benefits for implantable in vivo applications for recording and stimulation of electrophysiological activity from electrogenic biological tissues (most commonly neurons and muscles). Some applications involve only recording of electrophysiological activity, e.g., on the surface of the brain,18 the spinal cord,19 some involve only stimulation of electrophysiological activity, and some both.20
The main benefits of using sMEAs for in vivo applications are twofold. First, they can conform to the dynamic and often curved surfaces of biological tissues. Second, sMEAs cause significant smaller foreign body reaction than rigid MEAs because of the reduced mismatch in mechanical properties (stiffness) between the implant the tissue.
The main disadvantage of sMEAs for implanted applications is the mechanical robustness compared to rigid MEAs, which can cause the implant to break or tear.
In neural interfaces, sMEAs are utilized to record and stimulate neural activity. Their stretchability allows them to conform to the brain's surface or penetrate neural tissue without causing significant damage. This improves the quality of neural recordings and the effectiveness of neural stimulation, which is crucial for applications such as brain-machine interfaces.
Electrocorticography (EcoG) with stretchable MEAs offers a less invasive method for recording electrical activity from the brain's surface. These arrays can conform to the cortical surface, providing high-resolution, stable recordings even during brain movements. This capability is essential for applications such as epilepsy monitoring and brain-computer interfaces.
sMEAs are employed in cardiac monitoring and therapy. They can be wrapped around the heart to monitor electrical activity or deliver therapeutic electrical impulses. Their flexibility ensures they remain in contact with the heart's surface despite its constant motion. This application is vital for detecting and treating arrhythmias and other cardiac conditions, providing real-time monitoring and precise intervention.
sMEAs are used in in vitro research to study cellular responses under various mechanical conditions. They enable the monitoring and stimulation of cells in a controlled environment, providing insights into cellular behavior and disease mechanisms. This application is particularly useful in drug testing and the development of new therapies.
In soft robotics, sMEAs create sensors and actuators that can deform in response to external forces. These applications utilize the mechanical resilience and electrical functionality of sMEAs to develop robots capable of navigating complex environments and performing delicate tasks. Soft robotic systems equipped with sMEAs can adapt to various tasks, from medical procedures to industrial automation.
Stretchable microelectrode arrays represent an advancement in biomedical engineering, with potential applications in neural interfaces, cardiac monitoring, in vitro research, and soft robotics. Research and development efforts continue to focus on overcoming existing challenges to fully realize the potential of these devices.
Kyrylyuk, Andriy V.; van der Schoot, Paul (17 June 2008). "Continuum percolation of carbon nanotubes in polymeric and colloidal media". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105 (24): 8221–8226. Bibcode:2008PNAS..105.8221K. doi:10.1073/pnas.0711449105. PMC 2448818. PMID 18550818. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2448818 ↩
Pionteck, Jürgen; Wypych, George, eds. (2016). "Structure and Distribution of Non-Migrating Antistatics". Handbook of Antistatics. pp. 117–127. doi:10.1016/B978-1-895198-95-9.50011-X. ISBN 978-1-895198-95-9. 978-1-895198-95-9 ↩
Huck, Wilhelm T. S.; Bowden, Ned; Onck, Patrick; Pardoen, Thomas; Hutchinson, John W.; Whitesides, George M. (April 2000). "Ordering of Spontaneously Formed Buckles on Planar Surfaces". Langmuir. 16 (7): 3497–3501. doi:10.1021/la991302l. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩
Kim, Dae-Hyeong; Rogers, John A. (17 December 2008). "Stretchable Electronics: Materials Strategies and Devices". Advanced Materials. 20 (24): 4887–4892. Bibcode:2008AdM....20.4887K. doi:10.1002/adma.200801788. /wiki/Bibcode_(identifier) ↩
Graudejus, Oliver; Görrn, Patrick; Wagner, Sigurd (28 July 2010). "Controlling the Morphology of Gold Films on Poly(dimethylsiloxane)". ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 2 (7): 1927–1933. doi:10.1021/am1002537. PMID 20608644. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩
Lacour, Stéphanie P.; Chan, Donald; Wagner, Sigurd; Li, Teng; Suo, Zhigang (15 May 2006). "Mechanisms of reversible stretchability of thin metal films on elastomeric substrates". Applied Physics Letters. 88 (20). Bibcode:2006ApPhL..88t4103L. doi:10.1063/1.2201874. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:41467478 ↩
Graudejus, O.; Jia, Zheng; Li, Teng; Wagner, S. (June 2012). "Size-dependent rupture strain of elastically stretchable metal conductors". Scripta Materialia. 66 (11): 919–922. doi:10.1016/j.scriptamat.2012.02.034. PMC 3388513. PMID 22773917. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3388513 ↩
Gonzalez, Mario; Vandevelde, Bart; Christiaens, Wim; Hsu, Yung-Yu; Iker, François; Bossuyt, Frederick; Vanfleteren, Jan; Sluis, Olaf van der; Timmermans, P.H.M. (June 2011). "Design and implementation of flexible and stretchable systems". Microelectronics Reliability. 51 (6): 1069–1076. Bibcode:2011MiRe...51.1069G. doi:10.1016/j.microrel.2011.03.012. /wiki/Bibcode_(identifier) ↩
Fan, Jonathan A.; Yeo, Woon-Hong; Su, Yewang; Hattori, Yoshiaki; Lee, Woosik; Jung, Sung-Young; Zhang, Yihui; Liu, Zhuangjian; Cheng, Huanyu; Falgout, Leo; Bajema, Mike; Coleman, Todd; Gregoire, Dan; Larsen, Ryan J.; Huang, Yonggang; Rogers, John A. (7 February 2014). "Fractal design concepts for stretchable electronics". Nature Communications. 5 (1): 3266. Bibcode:2014NatCo...5.3266F. doi:10.1038/ncomms4266. OSTI 1875439. PMID 24509865. /wiki/Bibcode_(identifier) ↩
Chen, Xingru; Li, Yongkai; Wang, Xiaoyi; Yu, Hongyu (10 August 2022). "Origami Paper-Based Stretchable Humidity Sensor for Textile-Attachable Wearable Electronics". ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 14 (31): 36227–36237. doi:10.1021/acsami.2c08245. PMID 35912486. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩
Xu, Renxiao; Zverev, Anton; Hung, Aaron; Shen, Caiwei; Irie, Lauren; Ding, Geoffrey; Whitmeyer, Michael; Ren, Liangjie; Griffin, Brandon; Melcher, Jack; Zheng, Lily; Zang, Xining; Sanghadasa, Mohan; Lin, Liwei (3 December 2018). "Kirigami-inspired, highly stretchable micro-supercapacitor patches fabricated by laser conversion and cutting". Microsystems & Nanoengineering. 4 (1): 36. Bibcode:2018MicNa...4...36X. doi:10.1038/s41378-018-0036-z. PMC 6275159. PMID 31057924. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6275159 ↩
Maghribi, M.; Hamilton, J.; Polla, D.; Rose, K.; Wilson, T.; Krulevitch, P. (2002). "Stretchable micro-electrode array [for retinal prosthesis]". 2nd Annual International IEEE-EMBS Special Topic Conference on Microtechnologies in Medicine and Biology. Proceedings (Cat. No.02EX578). pp. 80–83. doi:10.1109/MMB.2002.1002269. ISBN 0-7803-7480-0. 0-7803-7480-0 ↩
Yu, Zhe; Tsay, Candice; Lacour, Stephanie P.; Wagner, Sigurd; Morrison, Barclay (2006). "Stretchable microelectrode arrays a tool for discovering mechanisms of functional deficits underlying traumatic brain injury and interfacing neurons with neuroprosthetics". 2006 International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Vol. Suppl. pp. 6732–6735. doi:10.1109/IEMBS.2006.260933. ISBN 1-4244-0032-5. PMID 17959498. 1-4244-0032-5 ↩
Meacham, Kathleen W.; Giuly, Richard J.; Guo, Liang; Hochman, Shawn; DeWeerth, Stephen P. (April 2008). "A lithographically-patterned, elastic multi-electrode array for surface stimulation of the spinal cord". Biomedical Microdevices. 10 (2): 259–269. doi:10.1007/s10544-007-9132-9. PMC 2573864. PMID 17914674. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2573864 ↩
Yu, Zhe; Graudejus, Oliver; Tsay, Candice; Lacour, Stéphanie P.; Wagner, Sigurd; Morrison, Barclay (July 2009). "Monitoring Hippocampus Electrical Activity In Vitro on an Elastically Deformable Microelectrode Array". Journal of Neurotrauma. 26 (7): 1135–1145. doi:10.1089/neu.2008.0810. PMC 2848944. PMID 19594385. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2848944 ↩
BMSEED. "Integrated Biomechanics, Imaging, & Electrophysiology." BMSEED, www.bmseed.com. Accessed 10 Nov. 2024. https://www.bmseed.com ↩
Graudejus, Oliver; Barton, Cody; Ponce Wong, Ruben D; Rowan, Cami C; Oswalt, Denise; Greger, Bradley (October 2020). "A soft and stretchable bilayer electrode array with independent functional layers for the next generation of brain machine interfaces". Journal of Neural Engineering. 17 (5): 056023. Bibcode:2020JNEng..17e6023G. doi:10.1088/1741-2552/abb4a5. PMC 7891917. PMID 33052886. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7891917 ↩
Rowan, Cami C.; Graudejus, Oliver; Otchy, Timothy M. (January 2022). "A Microclip Peripheral Nerve Interface (μcPNI) for Bioelectronic Interfacing with Small Nerves". Advanced Science. 9 (3): e2102945. doi:10.1002/advs.202102945. PMC 8787429. PMID 34837353. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8787429 ↩