↓ Skip to main content

Regenerated Sciatic Nerve Axons Stimulated through a Chronically Implanted Macro-Sieve Electrode

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Regenerated Sciatic Nerve Axons Stimulated through a Chronically Implanted Macro-Sieve Electrode
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2016.00557
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew R. MacEwan, Erik R. Zellmer, Jesse J. Wheeler, Harold Burton, Daniel W. Moran

Abstract

Sieve electrodes provide a chronic interface for stimulating peripheral nerve axons. Yet, successful utilization requires robust axonal regeneration through the implanted electrode. The present study determined the effect of large transit zones in enhancing axonal regeneration and revealed an intimate neural interface with an implanted sieve electrode. Fabrication of the polyimide sieve electrodes employed sacrificial photolithography. The manufactured macro-sieve electrode (MSE) contained nine large transit zones with areas of ~0.285 mm(2) surrounded by eight Pt-Ir metallized electrode sites. Prior to implantation, saline, or glial derived neurotropic factor (GDNF) was injected into nerve guidance silicone-conduits with or without a MSE. The MSE assembly or a nerve guidance conduit was implanted between transected ends of the sciatic nerve in adult male Lewis rats. At 3 months post-operation, fiber counts were similar through both implant types. Likewise, stimulation of nerves regenerated through a MSE or an open silicone conduit evoked comparable muscle forces. These results showed that nerve regeneration was comparable through MSE transit zones and an open conduit. GDNF had a minimal positive effect on the quality and morphology of fibers regenerating through the MSE; thus, the MSE may reduce reliance on GDNF to augment axonal regeneration. Selective stimulation of several individual muscles was achieved through monopolar stimulation of individual electrodes sites suggesting that the MSE might be an optimal platform for functional neuromuscular stimulation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 76 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 14%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 17 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 26 33%
Neuroscience 10 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Materials Science 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 21 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 December 2016.
All research outputs
#20,817,837
of 26,450,025 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,979
of 11,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#308,329
of 426,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#97
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,450,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,881 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 426,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.