Abonnement à la biblothèque: Guest
Portail numérique Bibliothèque numérique eBooks Revues Références et comptes rendus Collections
Critical Reviews™ in Biomedical Engineering
SJR: 0.207 SNIP: 0.376 CiteScore™: 0.79

ISSN Imprimer: 0278-940X
ISSN En ligne: 1943-619X

Volume 47, 2019 Volume 46, 2018 Volume 45, 2017 Volume 44, 2016 Volume 43, 2015 Volume 42, 2014 Volume 41, 2013 Volume 40, 2012 Volume 39, 2011 Volume 38, 2010 Volume 37, 2009 Volume 36, 2008 Volume 35, 2007 Volume 34, 2006 Volume 33, 2005 Volume 32, 2004 Volume 31, 2003 Volume 30, 2002 Volume 29, 2001 Volume 28, 2000 Volume 27, 1999 Volume 26, 1998 Volume 25, 1997 Volume 24, 1996 Volume 23, 1995

Critical Reviews™ in Biomedical Engineering

DOI: 10.1615/CritRevBiomedEng.v39.i1.20
pages 5-28

Brain-Machine Interfaces: Electrophysiological Challenges and Limitations

Bradley C. Lega
Department of Neurosurgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, University of Pennsylvania
Mijail D. Serruya
Department of Neurology, Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Kareem Zaghloul
Surgical Neurology Branch, NINDS, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda


Brain-machine interfaces (BMI) seek to directly communicate with the human nervous system in order to diagnose and treat intrinsic neurological disorders. While the first generation of these devices has realized significant clinical successes, they often rely on gross electrical stimulation using empirically derived parameters through open-loop mechanisms of action that are not yet fully understood. Their limitations reflect the inherent challenge in developing the next generation of these devices. This review identifies lessons learned from the first generation of BMI devices (chiefly deep brain stimulation), identifying key problems for which the solutions will aid the development of the next generation of technologies. Our analysis examines four hypotheses for the mechanism by which brain stimulation alters surrounding neurophysiologic activity. We then focus on motor prosthetics, describing various approaches to overcoming the problems of decoding neural signals. We next turn to visual prosthetics, an area for which the challenges of signal coding to match neural architecture has been partially overcome. Finally, we close with a review of cortical stimulation, examining basic principles that will be incorporated into the design of future devices. Throughout the review, we relate the issues of each specific topic to the common thread of BMI research: translating new knowledge of network neuroscience into improved devices for neuromodulation.

Articles with similar content:

Microstimulation: Principles, Techniques, and Approaches to Somatosensory Neuroprosthesis
Critical Reviews™ in Biomedical Engineering, Vol.43, 2015, issue 1
Mulugeta Semework
Chronic Pain: We Should Not Underestimate the Contribution of Neural Plasticity
Critical Reviews™ in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Vol.26, 2014, issue 1-2
David A. Rice, Gwyn N. Lewis
The Evolution of Neuroprosthetic Interfaces
Critical Reviews™ in Biomedical Engineering, Vol.44, 2016, issue 1-2
Mijail D. Serruya, D. Kacy Cullen, Dayo O. Adewole, H. Isaac Chen, Justin C. Burrell, James P. Harris, Dmitriy Petrov, John A. Wolf
Neuroengineering Modeling of Single Neuron and Neural Interface
Critical Reviews™ in Biomedical Engineering, Vol.30, 2002, issue 4-6
X. L. Hu, Y. T. Zhang, J. Yao
Temporal Coding as a Means of Information Transfer in the Primate Visual System
Critical Reviews™ in Neurobiology, Vol.13, 1999, issue 1
Timothy J. Gawne