↓ Skip to main content

Invasive Intraneural Interfaces: Foreign Body Reaction Issues

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Readers on

mendeley
199 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
Invasive Intraneural Interfaces: Foreign Body Reaction Issues
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00497
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fiorenza Lotti, Federico Ranieri, Gianluca Vadalà, Loredana Zollo, Giovanni Di Pino

Abstract

Intraneural interfaces are stimulation/registration devices designed to couple the peripheral nervous system (PNS) with the environment. Over the last years, their use has increased in a wide range of applications, such as the control of a new generation of neural-interfaced prostheses. At present, the success of this technology is limited by an electrical impedance increase, due to an inflammatory response called foreign body reaction (FBR), which leads to the formation of a fibrotic tissue around the interface, eventually causing an inefficient transduction of the electrical signal. Based on recent developments in biomaterials and inflammatory/fibrotic pathologies, we explore and select the biological solutions that might be adopted in the neural interfaces FBR context: modifications of the interface surface, such as organic and synthetic coatings; the use of specific drugs or molecular biology tools to target the microenvironment around the interface; the development of bio-engineered-scaffold to reduce immune response and promote interface-tissue integration. By linking what we believe are the major crucial steps of the FBR process with related solutions, we point out the main issues that future research has to focus on: biocompatibility without losing signal conduction properties, good reproducible in vitro/in vivo models, drugs exhaustion and undesired side effects. The underlined pros and cons of proposed solutions show clearly the importance of a better understanding of all the molecular and cellular pathways involved and the need of a multi-target action based on a bio-engineered combination approach.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 199 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 199 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 19%
Student > Bachelor 27 14%
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Master 23 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 56 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 48 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 9%
Chemistry 15 8%
Neuroscience 13 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 4%
Other 34 17%
Unknown 64 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 24 December 2022.
All research outputs
#6,823,356
of 26,557,556 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#4,432
of 11,936 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,949
of 328,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#43
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,557,556 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,936 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
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 328,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 159 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.