Nine decades of electrocorticography: A comparison between epidural and subdural recordings

Abstract

AbstractIn recent years, electrocorticography (ECoG) has arisen as a neural signal recording tool in the development of clinically viable neural interfaces. ECoG electrodes are generally placed below the dura mater (subdural) but can also be placed on top of the dura (epidural). In deciding which of these modalities best suits long‐term implants, complications and signal quality are important considerations. Conceptually, epidural placement may present a lower risk of complications as the dura is left intact but also a lower signal quality due to the dura acting as a signal attenuator. The extent to which complications and signal quality are affected by the dura, however, has been a matter of debate. To improve our understanding of the effects of the dura on complications and signal quality, we conducted a literature review. We inventorized the effect of the dura on signal quality, decodability and longevity of acute and chronic ECoG recordings in humans and non‐human primates. Also, we compared the incidence and nature of serious complications in studies that employed epidural and subdural ECoG. Overall, we found that, even though epidural recordings exhibit attenuated signal amplitude over subdural recordings, particularly for high‐density grids, the decodability of epidural recorded signals does not seem to be markedly affected. Additionally, we found that the nature of serious complications was comparable between epidural and subdural recordings. These results indicate that both epidural and subdural ECoG may be suited for long‐term neural signal recordings, at least for current generations of clinical and high‐density ECoG grids.