Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Soft and elastic hydrogel-based microelectronics for localized low-voltage neuromodulation


Narrowing the mechanical mismatch between tissue and implantable microelectronics is essential for reducing immune responses and for accommodating body movement. However, the design of implantable soft electronics (on the order of 10 kPa in modulus) remains a challenge because of the limited availability of suitable electronic materials. Here, we report electrically conductive hydrogel-based elastic microelectronics with Young’s modulus values in the kilopascal range. The system consists of a highly conductive soft hydrogel as a conductor and an elastic fluorinated photoresist as the passivation insulation layer. Owing to the high volumetric capacitance and the passivation layer of the hydrogel, electrode arrays of the thin-film hydrogel ‘elastronics’, 20 μm in feature size, show a significantly reduced interfacial impedance with tissue, a current-injection density that is ~30 times higher than that of platinum electrodes, and stable electrical performance under strain. We demonstrate the use of the soft elastronic arrays for localized low-voltage electrical stimulation of the sciatic nerve in live mice.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: An ECH and stretchable encapsulation material with tissue-level Young’s modulus.
Fig. 2: Lithographically patterned hydrogel elastronics.
Fig. 3: Aqueous stability and biocompatibility.
Fig. 4: MECHs display high current density and low impedance.
Fig. 5: Low-voltage in vivo neural stimulation.

Data availability

The authors declare that all data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper and its Supplementary Information.


  1. 1.

    Kringelbach, M. L., Jenkinson, N., Owen, S. L. F. & Aziz, T. Z. Translational principles of deep brain stimulation. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 8, 623–635 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Borovikova, L. V. et al. Vagus nerve stimulation attenuates the systemic inflammatory response to endotoxin. Nature 405, 458–462 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Lacour, S. P., Courtine, G. & Guck, J. Materials and technologies for soft implantable neuroprostheses. Nat. Rev. Mater. 1, 16063 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    FeinerR. & Dvir, T. Tissue-electronics interfaces: from implantable devices to engineered tissues. Nat. Rev. Mater. 3, 17076 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Salatino, J. W., Ludwig, K. A., Kozai, T. D. Y. & Purcell, E. K. Glial responses to implanted electrodes in the brain. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 1, 862–877 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Someya, T., Bao, Z. & Malliaras, G. G. The rise of plastic bioelectronics. Nature 540, 379–385 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Khodagholy, D. et al. NeuroGrid: recording action potentials from the surface of the brain. Nat. Neurosci. 18, 310–315 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Canales, A. et al. Multifunctional fibers for simultaneous optical, electrical and chemical interrogation of neural circuits in vivo. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 277–284 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Kim, J. et al. Stretchable silicon nanoribbon electronics for skin prosthesis. Nat. Commun. 5, 5747 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Xu, L. et al. 3D multifunctional integumentary membranes for spatiotemporal cardiac measurements and stimulation across the entire epicardium. Nat. Commun. 5, 3329 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Liu, J. et al. Syringe-injectable electronics. Nat. Nanotechnol. 10, 629–636 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Minev, I. R. et al. Electronic dura mater for long-term multimodal neural interfaces. Science 347, 159–163 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Hong, G., Yang, X., Zhou, T. & Lieber, C. M. Mesh electronics: a new paradigm for tissue-like brain probes. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 50, 33–41 (2018).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Jeong, J. W. et al. Soft materials in neuroengineering for hard problems in neuroscience. Neuron 86, 175–186 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Caliari, S. R. & Burdick, J. A. A practical guide to hydrogels for cell culture. Nat. Methods 13, 405–414 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Sharma, B. et al. Human cartilage repair with a photoreactive adhesive-hydrogel composite. Sci. Transl Med. 5, 167ra6 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Yuk, H., Zhang, T., Lin, S., Parada, G. A. & Zhao, X. Tough bonding of hydrogels to diverse non-porous surfaces. Nat. Mater. 15, 190–196 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Kang, H.-W. et al. A 3D bioprinting system to produce human-scale tissue constructs with structural integrity. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 312–319 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Keplinger, C. et al. Stretchable, transparent, ionic conductors. Science 341, 984–987 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Sekine, S., Ido, Y., Miyake, T., Nagamine, K. & Nishizawa, M. Conducting polymer electrodes printed on hydrogel. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 13174–13175 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Sasaki, M. et al. Highly conductive stretchable and biocompatible electrode–hydrogel hybrids for advanced tissue engineering. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 3, 1919–1927 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Abidian, M. R. et al. Hybrid conducting polymer-hydrogel conduits for axonal growth and neural tissue engineering. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 1, 762–767 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Hassarati, R. T. et al. Improving cochlear implant properties through conductive hydrogel coatings. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 22, 411–418 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Abidian, M. R. & Martin, D. C. Multifunctional nanobiomaterials for neural interfaces. Adv. Funct. Mater. 19, 573–585 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Feig, V. R., Tran, H., Lee, M. & Bao, Z. Mechanically tunable conductive interpenetrating network hydrogels that mimic the elastic moduli of biological tissue. Nat. Commun. 9, 2740 (2018); correction 9, 5030 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Green, R. A. et al. Conductive hydrogels: mechanically robust hybrids for use as biomaterials. Macromol. Biosci. 12, 494–501 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Amella, A. D. et al. Freestanding, soft bioelectronics. In Proc. 7th International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering (NER) 607–610 (IEEE, 2015).

  28. 28.

    Ding, H. et al. Biologically derived soft conducting hydrogels using heparin-doped polymer networks. ACS Nano 8, 4348–4357 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Kim, D. H., Abidian, M. & Martin, D. C. Conducting polymers grown in hydrogel scaffolds coated on neural prosthetic devices. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 71, 577–585 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Kim, D. H., Wiler, J. A., Anderson, D. J., Kipke, D. R. & Martin, D. C. Conducting polymers on hydrogel-coated neural electrode provide sensitive neural recordings in auditory cortex. Acta Biomater. 6, 57–62 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Guiseppi-Elie, A. Electroconductive hydrogels: synthesis, characterization and biomedical applications. Biomaterials 31, 2701–2716 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Chung, D. Materials for Electronic Packaging (Butterworth-Heinemann, Newton, 1995).

  33. 33.

    Yu, D., Yang, Y. Q., Chen, Z., Tao, Y. & Liu, Y. F. Recent progress on thin-film encapsulation technologies for organic electronic devices. Opt. Commun. 362, 43–49 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Wang, Y. et al. A highly stretchable, transparent, and conductive polymer. Sci. Adv. 3, e1602076 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Mawad, D., Lauto, A. & Wallace, G. G. in Polymeric Hydrogels as Smart Biomaterials (ed. Kalia, S.) 19–45 (Springer, New York, 2016).

  36. 36.

    Strakosas, X. et al. A facile biofunctionalisation route for solution processable conducting polymer devices. J. Mater. Chem. B 2, 2537–2545 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Khodagholy, D. et al. High transconductance organic electrochemical transistors. Nat. Commun. 4, 2133 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Akhtar, R., Sherratt, M. J., Cruickshank, J. K. & Derby, B. Characterizing the elastic properties of tissues. Mater. Today 14, 96–105 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Patil, A. C. & Thakor, N. V. Implantable neurotechnologies: a review of micro- and nanoelectrodes for neural recording. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 54, 23–44 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Pan, L. et al. Hierarchical nanostructured conducting polymer hydrogel with high electrochemical activity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 9287–9292 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Green, R. A., Baek, S., Poole-Warren, L. A. & Martens, P. J. Conducting polymer-hydrogels for medical electrode applications. Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 11, 014107 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Yang, J., Choe, G., Yang, S., Jo, H. & Lee, J. Y. Polypyrrole-incorporated conductive hyaluronic acid hydrogels. Biomater. Res. 20, 31 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Chen, R., Canales, A. & Anikeeva, P. Neural recording and modulation technologies. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2, 16093 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Green, R. A. et al. Substrate dependent stability of conducting polymer coatings on medical electrodes. Biomaterials 33, 5875–5886 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Yamato, H., Ohwa, M. & Wernet, W. Stability of polypyrrole and poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) for biosensor application. J. Electroanal. Chem. 397, 163–170 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Thaning, E. M., Asplund, A. L. M., Nyberg, T. A., Inganäs, O. W. & von Holst, H. Stability of poly(3,4-ethylene dioxythiophene) materials intended for implants. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B Appl. Biomater. 93, 407–415 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Xiao, Y. et al. Synthesis and characterization of p-toluenesulfonate incorporated poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene). Talanta 72, 532–538 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Cogan, S. F. Neural stimulation and recording electrodes. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 10, 275–309 (2008).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Wilks, S. Poly(3,4-ethylene dioxythiophene) (PEDOT) as a micro-neural interface material for electrostimulation. Front. Neuroeng. 2, 7 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Rose, T. L. & Robblee, L. S. Electrical stimulation with Pt electrodes. VIII. Electrochemically safe charge injection limits with 0.2 MS pulses. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 37, 1118–1120 (1990).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Goding, J., Gilmour, A., Martens, P., Poole-Warren, L. & Green, R. Interpenetrating conducting hydrogel materials for neural interfacing electrodes. Adv. Healthc. Mater. (2017).

  52. 52.

    Mario Cheong, G. L. et al. Conductive hydrogels with tailored bioactivity for implantable electrode coatings. Acta Biomater. 10, 1216–1226 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Grill, W. M. & Mortimer, J. T. Neural and connective tissue response to long-term implantation of multiple contact nerve cuff electrodes. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 50, 215–226 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Agnew, W. F., McCreery, D. B., Yuen, T. G. H. & Bullara, L. A. Histologic and physiologic evaluation of electrically stimulated peripheral nerve: considerations for the selection of parameters. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 17, 39–60 (1989).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Larsen, J. O., Thomsen, M., Haugland, M. & Sinkjær, T. Degeneration and regeneration in rabbit peripheral nerve with long-term nerve cuff electrode implant: a stereological study of myelinated and unmyelinated axons. Acta Neuropathol. 96, 365–378 (1998).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Schwarz, D. A. et al. Chronic, wireless recordings of large-scale brain activity in freely moving rhesus monkeys. Nat. Methods 11, 670–676 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Lee, H., Bellamkonda, R. V., Sun, W. & Levenston, M. E. Biomechanical analysis of silicon microelectrode-induced strain in the brain. J. Neural. Eng. 2, 81–89 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Rousche, P. J. et al. Flexible polyimide-based intracortical electrode arrays with bioactive capability. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 48, 361–370 (2001).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Luan, L. et al. Ultraflexible nanoelectronic probes form reliable, glial scar–free neural integration. Sci. Adv. 3, e1601966 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Zhou, T. et al. Syringe-injectable mesh electronics integrate seamlessly with minimal chronic immune response in the brain. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 5894–5899 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Rivnay, J. et al. Structural control of mixed ionic and electronic transport in conducting polymers. Nat. Commun. 7, 11287 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Rivnay, J. et al. High-performance transistors for bioelectronics through tuning of channel thickness. Sci. Adv. 1, e1400251 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Rivnay, J., Wang, H., Fenno, L., Deisseroth, K. & Malliaras, G. G. Next-generation probes, particles, and proteins for neural interfacing. Sci. Adv. 3, e1601649 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Abidian, M. R. & Martin, D. C. Experimental and theoretical characterization of implantable neural microelectrodes modified with conducting polymer nanotubes. Biomaterials 29, 1273–1283 (2008).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Williamson, A. et al. Localized neuron stimulation with organic electrochemical transistors on delaminating depth probes. Adv. Mater. 27, 4405–4410 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Mawad, D. et al. A conducting polymer with enhanced electronic stability applied in cardiac models. Sci. Adv. 2, e1601007 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Hu, Z. et al. Photochemically cross-linked perfluoropolyether-based elastomers: synthesis, physical characterization, and biofouling evaluation. Macromolecules 42, 6999–7007 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


This work was partly supported by a Bio-X Interdisciplinary Initiatives Seed Grant and by BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. Part of this work was performed at the Stanford Nano Shared Facilities (SNSF), supported by the National Science Foundation under award ECCS-1542152. Y.L. is supported by a National Science Scholarship (A*STAR, Singapore). H.W. is supported by a NIH NRSA F32 postdoctoral fellowship. A.M.F. thanks the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada for a postdoctoral fellowship. X.W. is supported by a Life Science Research Foundation fellowship and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. We thank X. Liu, Y. Li and K. Zhang from the BOE Technology Group Co., LTD for discussions, A. Tom for assistance with some experiments, and Daikin Co. and Solvay for supplying PFPE-diols.

Author information




Y.L., J.L. and Z.B. designed the project and experiments. Y.L. synthesized the MECH. J.L. and T.L. synthesized the elastic fluorinated photoresist. Y.L. and J.L. fabricated the devices. Y.L., J.L., S.C. and Y.K. performed material and device characterization. Y.L., J.L. and A.M.F. prepared the schematics for elastronics and carried out device photography. Y.L., J.L., X.W. and H.W. performed immunofluorescence staining and data analyses. S.N. and Y.L. carried out the simulation of electrochemical impedance. Y.L. and J.L. carried out periphery nerve stimulation experiments on mice and analysed the data. Y.L., J.L., J.B.-H.T. and Z.B. wrote the manuscript. All authors reviewed and commented on the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhenan Bao.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

Stanford University has filed patent applications related to this technology. The patent application number is PCT/US2018/057855.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary figures and video captions

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Video 1

Anisotropic swelling of the MECH material

Supplementary Video 2

Electrical stimulation with the MECH electrode on the mouse sciatic nerve elicits toe movement

Supplementary Video 3

Comparison of electrical-stimulation efficiency of the MECH electrode and of a platinum electrode with the same electrode area on the mouse sciatic nerve

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, Y., Liu, J., Chen, S. et al. Soft and elastic hydrogel-based microelectronics for localized low-voltage neuromodulation. Nat Biomed Eng 3, 58–68 (2019).

Download citation

Further reading


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing