Intracortical Microstimulation: Regaining the senses of touch and movement
When we reach for a cup of coffee, our muscles and joints send feedback signals that inform our brain about changes in the position of our limbs and the forces acting on them. Then, when we actually grab the cup, our skin helps us make a successful grip by sensing that we have made contact with an object and relaying information about its temperature, weight and so on (Johansson and Flanagan, 2009). Without proprioceptive information – the sensory feedback from our tendons and muscles – and our sense of touch, it would be extremely difficult to perform even trivial tasks.
This is especially relevant to efforts to help people with damaged limbs or spinal cords regain their independence (Nicolelis, 2003). Thanks to recent advances in neuroscience and engineering, such patients can now be equipped with sophisticated robotic prostheses that enable them to walk or reach for objects. But these individuals are still missing the important senses of touch and proprioception that are needed to feel and control either paralyzed or artificial limbs (Bensmaia and Miller, 2014).
Now, in eLife, Richard Andersen of the California Institute of Technology and colleagues – including Michelle Salas and Luke Bashford as joint first authors – report that it is possible, in principle, to restore lost tactile and proprioceptive sensations in humans by directly activating the relevant neurons in the brain (Salas et al., 2018). In an amazing feat of neurosurgery and engineering, a tetraplegic patient was surgically implanted with metal electrodes in the somatosensory cortex, the area of the brain that processes internal and external sensations. Small electric currents were then injected through these electrodes, activating the neurons in the vicinity.
The power of intracortical microstimulation, as this technique is called, was first demonstrated almost 30 years ago when William T. Newsome and colleagues used it to show that perception of visual motion could be manipulated by injecting small currents near motion-sensitive neurons in the cortex of Rhesus monkeys (Salzman et al., 1990). As they wrote in their original report: “… it is remarkable that local microstimulation of directionally selective neurons can cause a substantial change in perception.” More recent work, also in non-human primates, has revealed that artificially activating touch or vision-related neurons elicits behavioral responses that are consistent with the animals having felt a mechanical vibration or a visual stimulus (Romo et al., 1998; Murphey and Maunsell, 2007).
However, microstimulation experiments in non-human animals cannot provide us with information about the subjective quality of the sensations evoked by the artificial activation of neurons. What does having information directly fed to our cortical neurons actually feel like? This question can only be answered by performing experiments on humans. A recent groundbreaking experiment by Robert Gaunt and collaborators, in which they used microstimulation on a tetraplegic patient, revealed that the majority of the tactile sensations evoked by the technique felt possibly natural by the participant (Flesher et al., 2016).
The new study by Salas et al. – who are based at Caltech, the Keck School of Medicine of USC and the Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center – goes a step further by being able to generate sensations of proprioception. Salas et al. showed that microstimulation of touch-related neurons within the somatosensory cortex of a tetraplegic patient can evoke natural sensations, similar to those experienced before the injury. In particular, the patient reported feeling sensations that resembled skin pressure, tapping and vibration, and also proprioceptive experiences that are normally associated with movements of the arm and hand. Microstimulation therefore appears to be a promising therapeutic way to restore both touch and proprioception in tetraplegic individuals.
However, for the technique to be an effective therapy, the interface between the electrode array and the cortical neurons needs to remain viable for years, if not decades. For this to be possible, future research should focus on replacing metal electrodes with electrodes made from new materials that are better suited to providing a long-lasting neuronal interface to the brain (Bareket-Keren and Hanein, 2012). In turn, this interface would allow the plastic nature of the brain to learn, better interpret, and ultimately embody the artificial electric signals originating from the neuronal implant. More generally, a successful neural interface would permit a constant and seamless interaction between our brains and future advances in technology. In addition to helping patients recover lost functions, such an interface might also help them gain new abilities like enhanced vision and hearing, or perception of magnetic fields.
References
-
Carbon nanotube-based multi electrode arrays for neuronal interfacing: progress and prospectsFrontiers in Neural Circuits 6:122.https://doi.org/10.3389/fncir.2012.00122
-
Restoring sensorimotor function through intracortical interfaces: progress and looming challengesNature Reviews Neuroscience 15:313–325.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3724
-
Intracortical microstimulation of human somatosensory cortexScience Translational Medicine 8:361ra141.https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf8083
-
Coding and use of tactile signals from the fingertips in object manipulation tasksNature Reviews Neuroscience 10:345–359.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2621
-
Brain-machine interfaces to restore motor function and probe neural circuitsNature Reviews Neuroscience 4:417–422.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1105
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
Copyright
© 2018, de Lafuente
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 2,044
- views
-
- 147
- downloads
-
- 4
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Further reading
-
- Neuroscience
At many vertebrate synapses, presynaptic functions are tuned by expression of different Cav2 channels. Most invertebrate genomes contain only one Cav2 gene. The Drosophila Cav2 homolog, cacophony (cac), induces synaptic vesicle release at presynaptic active zones (AZs). We hypothesize that Drosophila cac functional diversity is enhanced by two mutually exclusive exon pairs that are not conserved in vertebrates, one in the voltage sensor and one in the loop binding Caβ and Gβγ subunits. We find that alternative splicing in the voltage sensor affects channel activation voltage. Only the isoform with the higher activation voltage localizes to AZs at the glutamatergic Drosophila larval neuromuscular junction and is imperative for normal synapse function. By contrast, alternative splicing at the other alternative exon pair tunes multiple aspects of presynaptic function. While expression of one exon yields normal transmission, expression of the other reduces channel number in the AZ and thus release probability. This also abolishes presynaptic homeostatic plasticity. Moreover, reduced channel number affects short-term plasticity, which is rescued by increasing the external calcium concentration to match release probability to control. In sum, in Drosophila alternative splicing provides a mechanism to regulate different aspects of presynaptic functions with only one Cav2 gene.
-
- Neuroscience
Sleep loss increases AMPA-synaptic strength and number in the neocortex. However, this is only part of the synaptic sleep loss response. We report an increased AMPA/NMDA EPSC ratio in frontal-cortical pyramidal neurons of layers 2–3. Silent synapses are absent, decreasing the plastic potential to convert silent NMDA to active AMPA synapses. These sleep loss changes are recovered by sleep. Sleep genes are enriched for synaptic shaping cellular components controlling glutamate synapse phenotype, overlap with autism risk genes, and are primarily observed in excitatory pyramidal neurons projecting intra-telencephalically. These genes are enriched with genes controlled by the transcription factor, MEF2c, and its repressor, HDAC4. Sleep genes can thus provide a framework within which motor learning and training occur mediated by the sleep-dependent oscillation of glutamate-synaptic phenotypes.