MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Microelectrode Implantation in Human Insula: Technical Challenges and Recording Insights

2025· preprint· en· W4409587857 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daphné Citherlet, Sami Heymann, Maya Aderka, Katarzyna Jurewicz, B. Suresh Krishna, Manon Robert, Alain Bouthillier, Olivier Boucher, Dang Khoa Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsMicroelectrodeInsulaMultielectrode arrayNeurosciencePsychologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: Intracranial macroelectrode implantation is a pivotal clinical tool in the evaluation of drug-resistant epilepsy, allowing further insights into the localization of the epileptogenic zone and the delineation of eloquent cortical regions through cortical stimulation. Additionally, it provides an avenue to study brain functions by analyzing cerebral responses during neuropsychological paradigms. By combining macroelectrodes with microelectrodes, which allow to record the activity of individual neurons or smaller neural clusters, recordings could provide deeper insights into neuronal microcircuits and the brain’s transitions in epilepsy and contribute to a better understanding of neuropsychological functions. In this study, one or two hybrid macro-micro electrodes were implanted in the anterior-inferior insular region in patients with refractory epilepsy. We report our experience and share some preliminary results; we also provide some recommendations regarding the implantation procedure of hybrid electrodes in the insular cortex. Methods: Stereoelectroencephalography was performed in 13 patients, with one or two hybrid macro-microelectrodes positioned in the insular region in each patient. Research neuropsychological paradigms could not be done in two patients for clinical reasons. In total, 23 hybrid macro-microelectrodes with 8 microcontacts each were implanted, of which 20 were recorded. Spiking activity was detected and assessed using WaveClus3. Results: No spiking neural activity was detected in the microcontacts of the first 7 patients. After iterative refinement during this process, successful recordings were obtained from 13 microcontacts in the anterior-inferior insula in the last four patients (13/64, 20.3%). Hybrid electrode implantation was uneventful with no complications. Obstacles included the absence of spiking activity signals, unsuccessful microwire dispersion, and the interference of environmental electrical noise on recordings. Conclusions: Human microelectrode recording presents a complex array of challenges; yet it holds the potential to facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of individual neuronal attributes and their specific stimulus responses.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.162
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207