Subdural porous and notched mini-grid electrodes for wireless intracranial electroencephalographic recordings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intracranial electroencephalography (EEG) studies are widely used in the presurgical evaluation of drug-refractory patients with partial epilepsy. Because chronic implantation of intracranial electrodes carries a risk of infection, hemorrhage, and edema, it is best to limit the number of electrodes used without compromising the ability to localize the epileptogenic zone (EZ). There is always a risk that an intracranial study may fail to identify the EZ because of suboptimal coverage. We present a new subdural electrode design that will allow better sampling of suspected areas of epileptogenicity with lower risk to patients. METHOD: Impedance of the proposed electrodes was characterized in vitro using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. The appearance of the novel electrodes on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was tested by placing the electrodes into a gel solution (0.9% NaCl with 14 g gelatin). In vivo neural recordings were performed in male Sprague Dawley rats. Performance comparisons were made using microelectrode recordings from rat cortex and subdural/depth recordings from epileptic patients. Histological examinations of rat brain after 3-week icEEG intracerebral electroencephalography (icEEG) recordings were performed. RESULTS: The in vitro results showed minimum impedances for optimum choice of pure gold materials for electrode contacts and wire. Different attributes of the new electrodes were identified on MRI. The results of in vivo recordings demonstrated signal stability, 50% noise reduction, and up to 6 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) improvement as compared to commercial electrodes. The wireless icEEG recording system demonstrated on average a 2% normalized root-mean-square (RMS) deviation. Following the long-term icEEG recording, brain histological results showed no abnormal tissue reaction in the underlying cortex. CONCLUSION: The proposed subdural electrode system features attributes that could potentially translate into better icEEG recordings and allow sampling of large of areas of epileptogenicity at lower risk to patients. Further validation for use in humans is required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".