Jump to content

Talk:Neuroprosthetics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

I just removed a re-direct here to Talk:Brain implant -- I am not sure why it existed. --Ben Houston 18:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Additions

[edit]

I'm considering having a go at revising this article to:

A) include a broader spread of neuroprosthetics applications e.g. Functional Neuromuscular Stimulation/FES, Implanted Stimulator-Telemeters, Artificial Pacemaker (also a neural prosthetic device).

B) complete the logical division between sensory and motor prostheses with a section on cognitive prostheses i.e. the proposed Hippocampal Implant.

Has anyone watching got any thoughts on this? Simbamford 04:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please continuing editing - its needs it. One thing to watch is managing the overlap with Brain-computer interface. Perhaps it would be worth shifting the Berger and Kennedy material there and using Neuroprosthetics as the high level article that links all the others together? Saganaki- 05:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Artificial (Cardiac) Pacemaker ?

[edit]

I have reservations about the inclusion of the artificial cardiac pacemaker in this article. As far as I am aware, cardiac pacemakers stimulate the excitable tissue (read: muscle) of the heart directly not via the nervous system. There may be some (experimental?) cardiac pacemakers that seek to affect heart function by stimulation of the Vagus nerve, but if they exist they are certainly the exception, not the rule. And in any rate I have not been able to find any information about them. Are there any objections to the removal of this section? --joeyo (talk) 18:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CIA and MKULTRA

[edit]

HonestGeorgeWashington (talk · contribs) has added some very dubiously sourced material about the CIA to this article. I removed it with an explanatory edit summary, and HGW reverted with no explanation. Because I don't like to multi-revert even in clear cases, I have opened a thread about this issue at WP:FTN#HonestGeorgeWashington on Neuroprosthetics. I'm explaining all this here in the interest of transparency. Looie496 (talk) 02:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reads like a Magazine Article

[edit]

For example, "The future holds an exciting prospect for the every day use of a variety of neural prostheses."

Although this may be the case, it's not very encyclopaedic and to me reads like a news report or magazine article. Kookas (talk) 11:14, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I encourage you to improve it. Looie496 (talk) 18:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neural Engineering Labs

[edit]
"(for a list of universities see Neural Engineering - Neural Engineering Labs)"

No such list exists!! WTS!?!?!? --Test35965 (talk) 04:44, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]

I propose to merge Brain implant into Neuroprosthetics, those are essentially the same thing and do not warrant two separate articles. Lophostrix (talk) 19:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think they are completely different. This one is about limbs but brain implant is on neural signal pickup from inside the brain dennis97519 (talk) 13:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's a fundamental contradiction in the distinction that you made: motor prostheses (which are "about" limbs) are devices that pick-up neural signals, and pretty much all the brain-implanted devices that do not pick-up signals have nothing to do with limbs (sensory/therapeutic implants). Brain implants are actually a subset of Neuroprosthetics, that include also sensory (cochlear and retinal) implants and peripheral nerve stimulators. However, there is absolutely no convention in this field that "neuroprosthetics" are specific to limbs as you wrote, or that "brain implants" are just for signal picking up (the article mentions for example the Utah array, which is a bidirectional device) - please provide a reliable external source that state this. Additionally, both articles do not make the distinction which I've just portrayed, and treat the topic as identical: the brain implant article, which is much shorter, deals extensively with stimulation and with ethical, philosophical and fictional aspects of stimulation. The neuroprosthetics article deals extensively which "pick-up signals", esp. those used for limbs... Lophostrix (talk) 12:00, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea to me. For extra messiness, I see there is also a discussion about overlap with Brain-Computer interface. Lisatansey (talk) 04:18, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I second this notion, and not because the topics are identical either. Take William Dobelle's work for example: How does one classify it? His system connect(ed) to a central computer so it is a BCI (strictly speaking). However, it also restores missing biological functions (sight) so it can be additionally considered a Neuroprosthesis. These topics are far from the same but there is no need to keep them on separate pages given their considerable common ground. It confuses readers and gives editors more busywork IMO MrNick01 (talk) 16:48, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, on the grounds that brain implants are not a subset of neuroprosthetics and that while it might be conceivable to have a page on Brain implants and neuroprosthetics, each is sufficiently independently notable to warrant a separate page. There are examples of brain implants which might be prosthetics, but such examples can be discussed on each page. The brain implant describes many sensory devices which don't seek to replace biological functions (that is, they are not prosthetics), but to record from the brains as a means of understanding or intercepting (for other reasons) its activity. Klbrain (talk) 21:59, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copied sections?

[edit]

I'm not entirely certain, but I think some sections may have been copied verbatim from this. Is the "...Anderson Paper, Cole at NIH - specifically "Computer software as an orthosis for Brain Injury".." bit referring to this paper? Me, Myself & I (talk) 01:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Science fiction

[edit]

The following needs to be completely rewritten to make it clear that it is talking about WP:CRYSTALBALL stuff and/or is unsourced OR, or is OFFTOPIC handwavy stats about the market size/unmet need.

Cognitive prostheses

Cognitive prostheses seek to restore cognitive function to individuals with brain tissue loss due to injury, disease, or stroke by performing the function of the damaged tissue with integrated circuits.[1] The theory of localization states that brain functions are localized to a specific portion of the brain.[2] However, recent studies on brain plasticity suggest that the brain is capable of rewiring itself so that an area of the brain traditionally associated with a particular function (e.g. auditory cortex) can perform functions associated with another portion of the brain. (e.g. auditory cortex processing visual information).[3] Implants could take advantage of brain plasticity to restore cognitive function even if the native tissue has been destroyed.

Applications
Alzheimer's disease

Alzheimer's disease is a presenile dementia characterized cellularly by the appearance of unusual helical protein filaments in nerve cells (neurofibrillary tangles), and by degeneration in cortical regions of brain, especially frontal and temporal lobes.[4] It is projected to affect more than 107 million people worldwide by the year 2050.[5] Due to increased life spans, more and more people are being affected by Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's disease renders individuals incapable of supporting themselves. Many of the more severe cases of Alzheimer's patients end up in nursing homes. Even a small measure of success by cognitive implants would help keep Alzheimer's patients out of nursing homes.

Hippocampal deficits

Dr. Theodore Berger at the University of Southern California, and Drs. Sam A. Deadwyler and Robert E. Hampson at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, are developing a prosthetic for treatments of hippocampal detriments including Alzheimer's.[1] Degenerative hippocampal neurons are the root cause of the memory disorders that accompany Alzheimer's disease. Also, hippocampal pyramidal cells are extremely sensitive to even brief periods of anoxia, like those that occur during stroke. The classic case of H.M. Henry Molaison established the role of the hippocampus in the formation of new memories. Loss of hippocampal neurons in the dentate gyrus, an area associated with this new memory formation has been attributed to blunt head trauma.[6] Hippocampal dysfunction has also been linked to epileptic activity.[1] This demonstrates the wide scope of neural damage and neurodegenerative disease conditions for which a hippocampal prosthesis would be clinically relevant.

Traumatic brain injury

More than 1.7 million people in the United States suffer traumatic brain injury (TBI) every year.[7] Orthosis for TBI patients to control limb movement via devices that read neurons in brain, calculate limb trajectory, and stimulate needed motor pools to make movement.[8]

Parkinson's disease

Nearly 1 million people in the United States are affected by Parkinson's disease.[9] Deep brain stimulation relieves symptoms of Parkinson's disease for numerous patients.[10] Parkinson's Disease patients could benefit from a cortical device that mimics the natural signals needed to promote dopamine production. Another possible avenue for mitigation of PD is a device that supplements dopamine when given specific neuronal inputs which would let the body regulate dopamine levels with its intrinsic sensors.

Speech deficits

Approximately 7.5 million people in the United States have trouble speaking.[11] Many of these can be attributed to aphasias. The success of cochlear implants suggest that cortical implants to the speech areas of the brain can be developed to improve speech in such patients.

Paralysis

According to the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation's[12] Paralysis Resource Center, approximately 6 million people are living with paralysis in the United States. Paralysis results from many sources, stroke, traumatic brain injury, neurodegenerative diseases like multiple sclerosis and Lou Gehrig's disease, and congenital sources. Many patients would benefit from a prosthetic device that controls limb movement via devices that read neurons in brain, calculate limb trajectory, and stimulate the needed motor pools to make movement. This technology is being developed at the Andersen Lab, located at the California Institute of Technology. The goal is to develop a device to enable locked in patients, those without the ability to move or speak, to communicate with others.

Spinal cord injuries

Neuroprosthetics have been shown to be an effective and safe method in restoring hand movement in adults following spinal cord injuries. This neuroprosthesis consists of an implanted receiver-stimulator, an external shoulder position sensor and a terminal electrode. The terminal electrode is placed on the motor point of a muscle, this enables a low electrical threshold to be utilized . The external sensor measures voluntary movements that occur in the countralateral (opposite) shoulder and bases motor output commands on this information. A radiofrequency signal is then transmitted to the implanted receiver stimulator and is later converted to an electrical stimuli that depolarizes the peripheral nerve. Evaluations of the neuroprosthetic are performed based on clinical outcome which measure the improvement of hand function on scales of impairment and performance of daily living.[13]

References

  1. ^ a b c Berger, T. W., Ahuja, A., Courellis, S. H., Deadwyler, S. A., Erinjippurath, G., Gerhardt, G. A., et al. (2005). Restoring lost cognitive function. Ieee Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 24(5), 30-44.
  2. ^ Zolamorgan, S. (1995). LOCALIZATION OF BRAIN-FUNCTION - THE LEGACY OF GALL,FRANZ,JOSEPH (1758-1828). [Review]. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 359-383.
  3. ^ Allman, B. L., Keniston, L. P., & Meredith, M. A. (2009). Adult deafness induces somatosensory conversion of ferret auditory cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(14), 5925-5930.
  4. ^ Lackie JM. Alzheimer’s Disease. The dictionary of cell and molecular biology.Fifth edition. ed.: Elsevier/AP; 2013. p. 27-27.
  5. ^ Brookmeyer, R; Johnson, E; Ziegler-Graham, K; Arrighi, HM (July 2007). "Forecasting the global burden of Alzheimer's disease". Alzheimer's and Dementia 3 (3): 186–91.
  6. ^ Helen Scharfman, ed (2007). The Dentate Gyrus: A comprehensive guide to structure, function, and clinical implications. 163. 1-840.
  7. ^ Center for Disease Control and Prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/NCIPC/tbi/FactSheets/Facts_About_TBI.pdfTraumatic Brain Injury. Accessed 11/14/2009. Updated 07/2006.
  8. ^ Anderson Paper, Cole at NIH - specifically "Computer software as an orthosis for Brain Injury"
  9. ^ Parkinson's Disease Foundation
  10. ^ Li, S., Arbuthnott, G. W., Jutras, M. J., Goldberg, J. A., & Jaeger, D. (2007). Resonant antidromic cortical circuit activation as a consequence of high-frequency subthalamic deep-brain stimulation. [Article]. Journal of Neurophysiology, 98(6), 3525-3537.
  11. ^ National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institutes of Health. http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/statistics/vsl.asp Accessed 11/21/2009. Updated 6/18/2009.
  12. ^ http://www.christopherreeve.org/
  13. ^ Keith, Michael W (2001-01-11). "NEUROPROSTHESES FOR THE UPPER EXTREMITY". Microsurgery. 21: 253–263.

-- Jytdog (talk) 00:51, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced

[edit]

Not sourced. Moved here per WP:PRESERVE. Per WP:BURDEN don't restore without finding independent reliable sources and fleshing this out so it is NPOV.

Commercial technology

Medtronic and Advanced Bionics are significant commercial names in the emergent market of Deep Brain Stimulation. Cyberkinetics is the first venture capital funded neural prosthetic company.

-- Jytdog (talk) 00:54, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to REDIRECT Neurobionics to Neuroprosthetics

[edit]

As it currently stands, the definition of neurobionics seems to very closely resemble the definition of neuroprosthetics, with the latter being by far the preferred term. Other than the definition, the neurobionics article contains very little information—most of which is anecdotal and crudely worded— and its only reference is to a book published in 1993. In view of this, I propose blanking neurobionics & redirecting it to neuroprosthetics. See Talk:Neurobionics for additional details and to start/join a centralized discussion. Thank you! Cffisac (talk) 08:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Going ahead with the blank and redirect. Cffisac (talk) 23:36, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Neuroprosthetics&oldid=1207169553"