Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTaylor, Cameron R.
dc.contributor.authorClark, William H.
dc.contributor.authorClarrissimeaux, Ellen G.
dc.contributor.authorYeon, Seong Ho
dc.contributor.authorCarty, Matthew J.
dc.contributor.authorLipsitz, Stuart R.
dc.contributor.authorBronson, Roderick T.
dc.contributor.authorRoberts, Thomas J.
dc.contributor.authorHerr, Hugh M.
dc.date.accessioned2022-11-21T16:44:29Z
dc.date.available2022-11-21T16:44:29Z
dc.date.issued2022-10-25
dc.identifier.issn2296-4185
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/146564
dc.description.abstract<jats:p>Human movement is accomplished through muscle contraction, yet there does not exist a portable system capable of monitoring muscle length changes in real time. To address this limitation, we previously introduced magnetomicrometry, a minimally-invasive tracking technique comprising two implanted magnetic beads in muscle and a magnetic field sensor array positioned on the body’s surface adjacent the implanted beads. The implant system comprises a pair of spherical magnetic beads, each with a first coating of nickel-copper-nickel and an outer coating of Parylene C. In parallel work, we demonstrate submillimeter accuracy of magnetic bead tracking for muscle contractions in an untethered freely-roaming avian model. Here, we address the clinical viability of magnetomicrometry. Using a specialized device to insert magnetic beads into muscle in avian and lagomorph models, we collect data to assess gait metrics, bead migration, and bead biocompatibility. For these animal models, we find no gait differences post-versus pre-implantation, and bead migration towards one another within muscle does not occur for initial bead separation distances greater than 3 cm. Further, using extensive biocompatibility testing, the implants are shown to be non-irritant, non-cytotoxic, non-allergenic, and non-irritating. Our cumulative results lend support for the viability of these magnetic bead implants for implantation in human muscle. We thus anticipate their imminent use in human-machine interfaces, such as in control of prostheses and exoskeletons and in closed-loop neuroprosthetics to aid recovery from neurological disorders.</jats:p>en_US
dc.publisherFrontiers Media SAen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.3389/fbioe.2022.1010276en_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licenseen_US
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_US
dc.sourceFrontiersen_US
dc.subjectBiomedical Engineeringen_US
dc.subjectHistologyen_US
dc.subjectBioengineeringen_US
dc.subjectBiotechnologyen_US
dc.titleClinical viability of magnetic bead implants in muscleen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.citationTaylor, Cameron R., Clark, William H., Clarrissimeaux, Ellen G., Yeon, Seong Ho, Carty, Matthew J. et al. 2022. "Clinical viability of magnetic bead implants in muscle." 10.
dc.contributor.departmentMcGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticleen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/PeerRevieweden_US
dspace.date.submission2022-11-21T16:21:48Z
mit.journal.volume10en_US
mit.licensePUBLISHER_CC
mit.metadata.statusAuthority Work and Publication Information Neededen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record