Innovating innervation: how non-biological targets can revolutionize amputation care

Abstract

Amputation is a historically well-grounded procedure, but such a traumatic operation invites a litany of postoperative complications, such as the formation of agonizing neuromas. Developments in mitigating these complications include the clinically successful targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) and regenerative peripheral nerve interface (RPNI), which showcased the potential for utilizing peripheral nerves' regenerative capabilities to circumvent neuroma formation and isolate neural activity for control of a sophisticated prosthetic device. Nevertheless, these techniques only record the aforementioned neural activity from the reinnervated muscle, not the nerve itself, which may ultimately limit the degree of functionality they can restore to amputees. Alternatively, regenerative sieve electrodes are non-biological end targets for reinnervation that utilize their porous structure to isolate regenerating axons into discrete transient zones lined with stimulating and recording electrodes. Albeit more invasive, such direct contact with the once-damaged nerve opens the door for highly selective, bi-directional neural interfaces with the capacity to restore higher degrees of sensorimotor functionality to patients for enhanced rehabilitation outcomes. By expanding the definition of innervation to include non-biological targets, clinicians can make room for these advancements in neural interfacing to revolutionize patient care.

References

[1] Karczewski AM,Poore SO.The need to work arm in arm: calling for collaboration in delivering neuroprosthetic limb replacements.Front Neurorobot2021;15:711028 PMCID:PMC8334559

[2] Mioton LM.Targeted muscle reinnervation and prosthetic rehabilitation after limb loss.J Surg Oncol2018;118:807-14

[3] Markatos K,Saranteas T.Hallmarks of amputation surgery.Int Orthop2019;43:493-9

[4] Herr HM,Srinivasan S.Reinventing extremity amputation in the era of functional limb restoration.Ann Surg2021;273:269-79

[5] Boldery E.Amputation neuroma in nerves implanted in bone.Ann Surg1943;118:1052-7 PMCID:PMC1617761

[6] Sachs M,Encke A.Historical evolution of limb amputation.World J Surg1999;23:1088-93

[7] Coker RA,Moran DW.Micro-channel sieve electrode for concurrent bidirectional peripheral nerve interface. Part A: recording.J Neural Eng2019;16:026001

[8] Coker RA,Moran DW.Micro-channel sieve electrode for concurrent bidirectional peripheral nerve interface. Part B: stimulation.J Neural Eng2019;16:026002.

[9] Lago N,Ramachandran A.Neurobiological assessment of regenerative electrodes for bidirectional interfacing injured peripheral nerves.IEEE Trans Biomed Eng2007;54:1129-37

[10] Lago N,Rodríguez FJ,Navarro X.Long term assessment of axonal regeneration through polyimide regenerative electrodes to interface the peripheral nerve.Biomaterials2005;26:2021-31

[11] Vela FJ,Ballestín A,Sánchez-Margallo FM.Animal models used to study direct peripheral nerve repair: a systematic review.Neural Regen Res2020;15:491-502 PMCID:PMC6921335

[12] Srinivasan A,Bentley JT.Microchannel-based regenerative scaffold for chronic peripheral nerve interfacing in amputees.Biomaterials2015;41:151-65 PMCID:PMC4324612

[13] Woeppel K,Cui XT.Recent advances in neural electrode-tissue interfaces.Curr Opin Biomed Eng2017;4:21-31 PMCID:PMC5798641

[14] Adewole DO,Harris JP.The evolution of neuroprosthetic interfaces.Crit Rev Biomed Eng2016;44:123-52 PMCID:PMC5541680

[15] Millevolte AXT,Ness JP.Improving the selectivity of an osseointegrated neural interface: proof of concept for housing sieve electrode arrays in the medullary canal of long bones.Front Neurosci2021;15:613844 PMCID:PMC8006940