BCI Atlas

INBRAIN’s graphene-based, high-density cortical interfaces aimed at precision neurology: high-resolution sensing + stimulation with a path toward closed-loop therapy (e.g., Parkinson’s).

Company — European

INBRAIN Neuroelectronics (company brief)

Official site → Barcelona, Spain

BCI · graphene · cortical interface · neuromodulation · INBRAIN

INBRAIN Neuroelectronics is a neurotechnology company pushing a very specific materials-driven bet: graphene electrodes, fabricated with semiconductor-style processes, as a path to higher-resolution sensing and safer, more stable stimulation than traditional metal electrodes.

Unlike many BCI companies whose public narrative is dominated by cursor control or typing demos, INBRAIN frames its core product as BCI-Tx (therapeutic BCI): decoding biomarkers and then modulating circuits with micrometer-scale targeting.

At a glance

The technology thesis: why graphene?

Graphene is attractive here because it is conductive carbon rather than a metal, and INBRAIN argues this changes the long-run electrochemistry of stimulation/recording interfaces.

IEEE Spectrum’s coverage summarizes INBRAIN’s argument:

  • metallic electrodes can undergo Faradaic reactions in aqueous tissue environments, degrading effectiveness over time

  • graphene can support high charge injection while avoiding the same failure mode, potentially improving stability over many stimulation pulses

  • IEEE Spectrum (Jul 23, 2024): “New Brain-Computer Interface Uses Graphene”

INBRAIN’s own platform description emphasizes:

  • high charge injection capacity + low electrical impedance → reduced power requirements → miniaturization

  • flexible, “skin-like” high-resolution interfaces

  • Company site: https://inbrain-neuroelectronics.com/

Interface design: high-density cortical film + precision surgery wedge

A key near-term wedge for high-density cortical interfaces is intraoperative mapping / precision neurosurgery.

INBRAIN reports a first-in-human use as part of tumor resection workflow:

  • the cortical interface is used to monitor brain activity and help distinguish cancerous vs healthy tissue during resection
  • performed at Salford Royal Hospital (Manchester)
  • described as part of a clinical study sponsored by the University of Manchester
  • the initial human study is described as 8–10 patients, aimed primarily at demonstrating graphene safety in direct brain contact

Primary institutional sources:

Therapeutic direction: Parkinson’s and closed-loop precision neuromodulation

INBRAIN’s public messaging places its platform in the closed-loop neuromodulation lane:

IEEE Spectrum notes INBRAIN received FDA Breakthrough Device Designation for its system as an adjunctive therapy in Parkinson’s disease, and discusses a strategy of decoding intention + pathological biomarkers (tremor/rigidity/freezing), with the longer-term goal of targeted therapy.

What to watch

  1. Chronic stability and safety The intraoperative/tumor-resection context is a pragmatic first step, but the real test is chronic implantation: stability of impedance, encapsulation, and stimulation safety over long durations.

  2. “High resolution” → clinical value High-density recordings can be impressive; the question is whether they translate into better outcomes (better resection margins, fewer deficits, or better control/therapy in movement disorders).

  3. Regulatory clarity They mention Breakthrough Device Designation for Parkinson’s. The most defensible version is to cite an FDA listing or a primary press release once we can fetch it reliably (some presswire endpoints are flaky).

Notes on sourcing

  • This brief leans on INBRAIN’s own platform description and on institutional reporting (Manchester + ICN2) for the first-in-human/tumor-resection context.
  • Technical rationale for graphene vs metal is anchored via IEEE Spectrum’s interview-style writeup.