Implanted Electrodes for Functional Electrical Stimulation to Restore Upper and Lower Extremity Function: History and Future Directions.

Functional electrical stimulation (FES) to activate nerves and muscles in paralyzed extremities has considerable promise to improve outcome after neurological disease or injury, especially in individuals who have upper motor nerve dysfunction due to central nervous system pathology. Because technology has improved, a wide variety of methods for providing electrical stimulation to create functional movements have been developed, including muscle stimulating electrodes, nerve stimulating electrodes, and hybrid constructs. However, in spite of decades of success in experimental settings with clear functional improvements for individuals with paralysis, the technology has not yet reached widespread clinical translation. In this review, we outline the history of FES techniques and approaches and describe future directions in evolution of the technology.

Restoration of reaching and grasping movements through brain-controlled muscle stimulation in a person with tetraplegia: a proof-of-concept demonstration.

BACKGROUND: People with chronic tetraplegia, due to high-cervical spinal cord injury, can regain limb movements through coordinated electrical stimulation of peripheral muscles and nerves, known as functional electrical stimulation (FES). Users typically command FES systems through other preserved, but unrelated and limited in number, volitional movements (eg, facial muscle activity, head movements, shoulder shrugs). We report the findings of an individual with traumatic high-cervical spinal cord injury who coordinated reaching and grasping movements using his own paralysed arm and hand, reanimated through implanted FES, and commanded using his own cortical signals through an intracortical brain-computer interface (iBCI). METHODS: We recruited a participant into the BrainGate2 clinical trial, an ongoing study that obtains safety information regarding an intracortical neural interface device, and investigates the feasibility of people with tetraplegia controlling assistive devices using their cortical signals. Surgical procedures were performed at University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center (Cleveland, OH, USA). Study procedures and data analyses were performed at Case Western Reserve University (Cleveland, OH, USA) and the US Department of Veterans Affairs, Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center (Cleveland, OH, USA). The study participant was a 53-year-old man with a spinal cord injury (cervical level 4, American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale category A). He received two intracortical microelectrode arrays in the hand area of his motor cortex, and 4 months and 9 months later received a total of 36 implanted percutaneous electrodes in his right upper and lower arm to electrically stimulate his hand, elbow, and shoulder muscles. The participant used a motorised mobile arm support for gravitational assistance and to provide humeral abduction and adduction under cortical control. We assessed the participant's ability to cortically command his paralysed arm to perform simple single-joint arm and hand movements and functionally meaningful multi-joint movements. We compared iBCI control of his paralysed arm with that of a virtual three-dimensional arm. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00912041. FINDINGS: The intracortical implant occurred on Dec 1, 2014, and we are continuing to study the participant. The last session included in this report was Nov 7, 2016. The point-to-point target acquisition sessions began on Oct 8, 2015 (311 days after implant). The participant successfully cortically commanded single-joint and coordinated multi-joint arm movements for point-to-point target acquisitions (80-100% accuracy), using first a virtual arm and second his own arm animated by FES. Using his paralysed arm, the participant volitionally performed self-paced reaches to drink a mug of coffee (successfully completing 11 of 12 attempts within a single session 463 days after implant) and feed himself (717 days after implant). INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first report of a combined implanted FES+iBCI neuroprosthesis for restoring both reaching and grasping movements to people with chronic tetraplegia due to spinal cord injury, and represents a major advance, with a clear translational path, for clinically viable neuroprostheses for restoration of reaching and grasping after paralysis. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health, Department of Veterans Affairs.

Feedback control policies employed by people using intracortical brain-computer interfaces.

OBJECTIVE: When using an intracortical BCI (iBCI), users modulate their neural population activity to move an effector towards a target, stop accurately, and correct for movement errors. We call the rules that govern this modulation a 'feedback control policy'. A better understanding of these policies may inform the design of higher-performing neural decoders. APPROACH: We studied how three participants in the BrainGate2 pilot clinical trial used an iBCI to control a cursor in a 2D target acquisition task. Participants used a velocity decoder with exponential smoothing dynamics. Through offline analyses, we characterized the users' feedback control policies by modeling their neural activity as a function of cursor state and target position. We also tested whether users could adapt their policy to different decoder dynamics by varying the gain (speed scaling) and temporal smoothing parameters of the iBCI. MAIN RESULTS: We demonstrate that control policy assumptions made in previous studies do not fully describe the policies of our participants. To account for these discrepancies, we propose a new model that captures (1) how the user's neural population activity gradually declines as the cursor approaches the target from afar, then decreases more sharply as the cursor comes into contact with the target, (2) how the user makes constant feedback corrections even when the cursor is on top of the target, and (3) how the user actively accounts for the cursor's current velocity to avoid overshooting the target. Further, we show that users can adapt their control policy to decoder dynamics by attenuating neural modulation when the cursor gain is high and by damping the cursor velocity more strongly when the smoothing dynamics are high. SIGNIFICANCE: Our control policy model may help to build better decoders, understand how neural activity varies during active iBCI control, and produce better simulations of closed-loop iBCI movements.

Prediction of imagined single-joint movements in a person with high-level tetraplegia.

Cortical neuroprostheses for movement restoration require developing models for relating neural activity to desired movement. Previous studies have focused on correlating single-unit activities (SUA) in primary motor cortex to volitional arm movements in able-bodied primates. The extent of the cortical information relevant to arm movements remaining in severely paralyzed individuals is largely unknown. We record intracortical signals using a microelectrode array chronically implanted in the precentral gyrus of a person with tetraplegia, and estimate positions of imagined single-joint arm movements. Using visually guided motor imagery, the participant imagined performing eight distinct single-joint arm movements, while SUA, multispike trains (MSP), multiunit activity, and local field potential time (LFPrms), and frequency signals (LFPstft) were recorded. Using linear system identification, imagined joint trajectories were estimated with 20-60% variance explained, with wrist flexion/extension predicted the best and pronation/supination the poorest. Statistically, decoding of MSP and LFPstft yielded estimates that equaled those of SUA. Including multiple signal types in a decoder increased prediction accuracy in all cases. We conclude that signals recorded from a single restricted region of the precentral gyrus in this person with tetraplegia contained useful information regarding the intended movements of upper extremity joints.