Leo A. Bullara

TL;DR: The activated iridium electrode is superior to Pt-30%Ir for chronic stimulations, from the standpoint of electrode tip stability, because with the former, in contrast to the alloy, detectable erosion occurred only at an intensity well above that required for activation of nearby neurons.

TL;DR: It is concluded that most of the neural damage from stimulations of the brain surface at the level used in this study derives from processes associated with passage of the stimulus current through tissue, such as neuronal hyperactivity rather than electrochemical reactions associated with current injection across the electrode-tissue interface.

TL;DR: The character of the SIDNE, including its localization to the immediate vicinity of the stimulating microElectrodes, suggests that the phenomenon is a direct consequence of the prolonged electrical excitation of the neurons close to the microelectrode, while the problem of designing microstimulation systems that allow high-frequency stimulation of a neural substrate, while minimizing SID NE are discussed.

TL;DR: Computer‐assisted morphometric and ultrastructural studies indicate that many of the damaged fibers had not regenerated by 125 days after stimulation, indicating that there is relatively little late‐onset injury associated with the stimulation.

TL;DR: The correlation between simple stimulus parameters and the amount of EAD was poor, especially with the ‘short pulse’ waveform, probably due to variability between animals, but when the stimulus was normalised with respect to the current required to fully recruit the large axons, a good association between damage and stimulus amplitude emerged.