Comparative study of tuning of microfabrication parameters for improving electrochemical performance of platinum and glassy carbon microelectrodes in neural prosthetics

  • Nha Uyen Huynh
  • Sam KassegneEmail author
  • George Youssef
Technical Paper


Neural prosthetics, which are increasingly being considered for the dual functionalities of recording and stimulation, are implanted in a corrosive biochemical environment that requires them to possess superior electrical and electrochemical stability and performance. These probes are required to withstand these operating conditions through billions of cycles of pulses of electrical stimulations and also maintain electrochemical sensitivity for potential applications in voltammetry. In this research, microelectrodes made of two material systems; namely, platinum and glassy carbon, supported on a flexible substrate are fabricated and investigated for correlation between process parameters and the electrochemical efficacy of the neural interfaces, particularly charge storage capacity and corrosion rate. Using scanning electron and atomic force microscopies, the correlation between process parameters, surface morphology and topography in both platinum and glassy carbon were investigated. The results demonstrate that changes in surface topography and the rate of corrosion are correlated to variations in the process parameters. Furthermore, the results indicate a relationship between surface roughness and corrosion rate, in which the increase or decrease of the former corresponds to a similar change in the latter.



This material is based on research work supported by National Science Foundation (NSF) Grant Number EEC-1028725 under the ERC program. The authors also acknowledge the use of equipment at the San Diego State University Electron Microscopy Facility acquired by NSF instrumentation grant DBI-0959908. The authors are grateful for Mr. Atif Mohammed for his assistance and insightful discussions about the AFM.


  1. ASTM (1999) Standard practice for calculation of corrosion rates and related information. ASTM G 102(89):1–7. Google Scholar
  2. Badea GE, Caraban A, Sebesan M et al (2010) Polarisation measurements used for corrosion rates determination. J Sustenabke Energy 1:1–4Google Scholar
  3. Bucher ES, Wightman RM (2015) Electrochemical analysis of neurotransmitters. Annu Rev Anal Chem 8:239–261. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cogan SF (2008) Neural stimulation and recording electrodes. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 10:275–309. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cogan SF, Ehrlich J, Plante TD et al (2010) Contribution of oxygen reduction to charge injection on platinum and sputtered iridium oxide neural stimulation electrodes. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 57:2313–2321. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Green RA, Lovell NH, Wallace GG, Poole-Warren LA (2008) Conducting polymers for neural interfaces: challenges in developing an effective long-term implant. Biomaterials 29:3393–3399. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Griessenauer CJ, Chang S-Y, Tye SJ et al (2010) Wireless instantaneous neurotransmitter concentration system: electrochemical monitoring of serotonin using fast-scan cyclic voltammetry—a proof-of-principle study. J Neurosurg 113:656–665. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gunasingham H, Fleet B (1982) Comparative study of glassy carbon as an electrode material. Analyst 107:896. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hadi M, Rouhollahi A, Yousefi M et al (2006) Electrochemical characterization of a pyrolytic carbon film electrode and the effect of anodization. Electroanalysis 18:787–792. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hirabayashi M, Mehta B, Vahidi NW et al (2013) Functionalization and characterization of pyrolyzed polymer based carbon microstructures for bionanoelectronics platforms. J Micromech Microeng. Google Scholar
  11. Hirabayashi M, Huynh NU, Witsell S et al (2017) In-vitro real-time coupled electrophysiological and electrochemical signals detection with glassy carbon microelectrodes. J Electrochem Soc 164:B3113–B3121. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kassegne S, Vomero M, Gavuglio R et al (2015) Electrical impedance, electrochemistry, mechanical stiffness, and hardness tunability in glassy carbon MEMS μeCoG electrodes. Microelectron Eng 133:36–44. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kotov NA, Winter JO, Clements IP et al (2009) Nanomaterials for neural interfaces. Adv Mater 21:3970–4004. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Koval Y, Geworski A, Gieb K et al (2014) Fabrication and characterization of glassy carbon membranes. J Vac Sci Technol B Nanotechnol Microelectron Mater Process Meas Phenom 32:042001. Google Scholar
  15. Mattox DM (1998) Handbook of physical vapor deposition (PVD) processing. Noyes Publications, Park RidgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Nimbalkar S, Castagnola E, Balasubramani A et al (2018) Ultra-capacitive carbon neural probe allows simultaneous long-term electrical stimulations and high-resolution neurotransmitter detection. Sci Rep 8:1–14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Peltola E, Heikkinen JJ, Sovanto K et al (2017) SU-8 based pyrolytic carbon for the electrochemical detection of dopamine. J Mater Chem B 5:9033–9044. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pfau J, Stieglitz T, Ordonez J (2017) Mechanical deformation and chemical degradation of thin-film platinum under aging and electrical stimulation. Int IEEE/EMBS Conf Neural Eng NER. Google Scholar
  19. Ranganathan S, McCreery R, Majji SM, Madou M (2000) Photoresist-derived carbon for microelectromechanical systems and electrochemical applications. J Electrochem Soc 147:277. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ritaccio A, Beauchamp M, Bosman C et al (2012) Proceedings of the third international workshop on advances in electrocorticography. Epilepsy Behav 25:605–613. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schuettler M (2007) Electrochemical properties of platinum electrodes in vitro: comparison of six different surface qualities. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2007:186–189. Google Scholar
  22. Sharma S, Madou M (2012) Micro and nano patterning of carbon electrodes for bioMEMS. Bioinspired Biomim Nanobiomater 1:252–265. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stieglitz T, Beutel H, Schuettler M, Meyer J-U (2000) Micromachined, polyimide-based devices for flexible neural interfaces. Biomed Microdevices 2:283–294. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. VanDersarl JJ, Mercanzini A, Renaud P (2015) Integration of 2D and 3D thin film glassy carbon electrode arrays for electrochemical dopamine sensing in flexible neuroelectronic implants. Adv Funct Mater 25:78–84. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Vomero M, van Niekerk P, Nguyen V et al (2016) A novel pattern transfer technique for mounting glassy carbon microelectrodes on polymeric flexible substrates. J Micromech Microeng 26:025018. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vomero M, Castagnola E, Ciarpella F et al (2017) Highly stable glassy carbon interfaces for long-term neural stimulation and low-noise recording of brain activity. Sci Rep 7:1–14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yuen TGH, Agnew WF (1995) Histological evaluation of polyesterimide-insulated gold wires in brain. Biomaterials 16:951–956. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zachek MK, Hermans A, Wightman RM, McCarty GS (2008) Electrochemical dopamine detection: comparing gold and carbon fiber microelectrodes using background subtracted fast scan cyclic voltammetry. J Electroanal Chem 614:113–120. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zittel HE, Miller FJ (1965) A glassy-carbon electrode for voltammetry. Anal Chem 37:200–203. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mechanical Engineering DepartmentSan Diego State UniversitySan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.NSF-ERC Center for NeurotechnologySeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations