Defining Surgical Terminology and Risk for Brain Computer Interface Technologies
With the emergence of numerous brain computer interfaces (BCI), their form factors, and clinical applications the terminology to describe their clinical deployment and the associated risk has been vague. The terms “minimally invasive” or “non-invasive” have been commonly used, but the risk can vary...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021-03-01
|
Series: | Frontiers in Neuroscience |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2021.599549/full |
id |
doaj-fbe45af7ea154d53b2b6c2e72a87c52b |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-fbe45af7ea154d53b2b6c2e72a87c52b2021-03-26T05:36:50ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Neuroscience1662-453X2021-03-011510.3389/fnins.2021.599549599549Defining Surgical Terminology and Risk for Brain Computer Interface TechnologiesEric C. Leuthardt0Eric C. Leuthardt1Eric C. Leuthardt2Eric C. Leuthardt3Eric C. Leuthardt4Eric C. Leuthardt5Eric C. Leuthardt6Daniel W. Moran7Daniel W. Moran8Tim R. Mullen9Department of Biomedical Engineering, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United StatesDepartment of Neuroscience, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United StatesDepartment of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, United StatesCenter for Innovation in Neuroscience and Technology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United StatesBrain Laser Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United StatesDivision of Neurotechnology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United StatesDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, United StatesDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United StatesIntheon Labs, San Diego, CA, United StatesWith the emergence of numerous brain computer interfaces (BCI), their form factors, and clinical applications the terminology to describe their clinical deployment and the associated risk has been vague. The terms “minimally invasive” or “non-invasive” have been commonly used, but the risk can vary widely based on the form factor and anatomic location. Thus, taken together, there needs to be a terminology that best accommodates the surgical footprint of a BCI and their attendant risks. This work presents a semantic framework that describes the BCI from a procedural standpoint and its attendant clinical risk profile. We propose extending the common invasive/non-invasive distinction for BCI systems to accommodate three categories in which the BCI anatomically interfaces with the patient and whether or not a surgical procedure is required for deployment: (1) Non-invasive—BCI components do not penetrate the body, (2) Embedded—components are penetrative, but not deeper than the inner table of the skull, and (3) Intracranial –components are located within the inner table of the skull and possibly within the brain volume. Each class has a separate risk profile that should be considered when being applied to a given clinical population. Optimally, balancing this risk profile with clinical need provides the most ethical deployment of these emerging classes of devices. As BCIs gain larger adoption, and terminology becomes standardized, having an improved, more precise language will better serve clinicians, patients, and consumers in discussing these technologies, particularly within the context of surgical procedures.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2021.599549/fullbrain computer interface (BCI)neuroprostheticsurgical riskterminologyECOGsingle neuron |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Daniel W. Moran Daniel W. Moran Tim R. Mullen |
spellingShingle |
Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Daniel W. Moran Daniel W. Moran Tim R. Mullen Defining Surgical Terminology and Risk for Brain Computer Interface Technologies Frontiers in Neuroscience brain computer interface (BCI) neuroprosthetic surgical risk terminology ECOG single neuron |
author_facet |
Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Eric C. Leuthardt Daniel W. Moran Daniel W. Moran Tim R. Mullen |
author_sort |
Eric C. Leuthardt |
title |
Defining Surgical Terminology and Risk for Brain Computer Interface Technologies |
title_short |
Defining Surgical Terminology and Risk for Brain Computer Interface Technologies |
title_full |
Defining Surgical Terminology and Risk for Brain Computer Interface Technologies |
title_fullStr |
Defining Surgical Terminology and Risk for Brain Computer Interface Technologies |
title_full_unstemmed |
Defining Surgical Terminology and Risk for Brain Computer Interface Technologies |
title_sort |
defining surgical terminology and risk for brain computer interface technologies |
publisher |
Frontiers Media S.A. |
series |
Frontiers in Neuroscience |
issn |
1662-453X |
publishDate |
2021-03-01 |
description |
With the emergence of numerous brain computer interfaces (BCI), their form factors, and clinical applications the terminology to describe their clinical deployment and the associated risk has been vague. The terms “minimally invasive” or “non-invasive” have been commonly used, but the risk can vary widely based on the form factor and anatomic location. Thus, taken together, there needs to be a terminology that best accommodates the surgical footprint of a BCI and their attendant risks. This work presents a semantic framework that describes the BCI from a procedural standpoint and its attendant clinical risk profile. We propose extending the common invasive/non-invasive distinction for BCI systems to accommodate three categories in which the BCI anatomically interfaces with the patient and whether or not a surgical procedure is required for deployment: (1) Non-invasive—BCI components do not penetrate the body, (2) Embedded—components are penetrative, but not deeper than the inner table of the skull, and (3) Intracranial –components are located within the inner table of the skull and possibly within the brain volume. Each class has a separate risk profile that should be considered when being applied to a given clinical population. Optimally, balancing this risk profile with clinical need provides the most ethical deployment of these emerging classes of devices. As BCIs gain larger adoption, and terminology becomes standardized, having an improved, more precise language will better serve clinicians, patients, and consumers in discussing these technologies, particularly within the context of surgical procedures. |
topic |
brain computer interface (BCI) neuroprosthetic surgical risk terminology ECOG single neuron |
url |
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2021.599549/full |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT ericcleuthardt definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies AT ericcleuthardt definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies AT ericcleuthardt definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies AT ericcleuthardt definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies AT ericcleuthardt definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies AT ericcleuthardt definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies AT ericcleuthardt definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies AT danielwmoran definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies AT danielwmoran definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies AT timrmullen definingsurgicalterminologyandriskforbraincomputerinterfacetechnologies |
_version_ |
1724202833942675456 |