Jul 2026· International science journal· Vol 4· 0 citations
TL;DR
The available evidence suggests that continued multidisciplinary collaboration and technological innovation will facilitate the progressive integration of BCIs into routine neurosurgical care, supporting personalized therapeutic strategies aimed at improving functional recovery, communication, and quality of life in patients with complex neurological disorders.
Abstract
Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have emerged as one of the most significant technological innovations in modern neurosurgery, integrating neuroscience, biomedical engineering, artificial intelligence, and clinical neurology to establish direct communication between the brain and external devices. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the current scientific evidence regarding the neurophysiological foundations, technological evolution, clinical applications, limitations, and future perspectives of BCIs in neurosurgical practice. A qualitative documentary review was conducted following the Scientific Method, using peer-reviewed literature retrieved from internationally recognized databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar. The analyzed evidence indicates that current clinical applications are primarily focused on motor restoration, neurorehabilitation, communication recovery, speech neuroprostheses, and adaptive neuromodulation for neurological disorders such as spinal cord injury, stroke, Parkinson's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and drug-resistant epilepsy. Recent advances in machine learning, implantable electrodes, wireless technologies, and closed-loop therapeutic systems have substantially improved neural decoding performance and expanded the potential clinical utility of BCIs. However, important challenges remain regarding long-term signal stability, biocompatibility, surgical safety, economic accessibility, regulatory frameworks, and equitable implementation across different healthcare systems. The available evidence suggests that continued multidisciplinary collaboration and technological innovation will facilitate the progressive integration of BCIs into routine neurosurgical care, supporting personalized therapeutic strategies aimed at improving functional recovery, communication, and quality of life in patients with complex neurological disorders.
The study stresses the necessity of embedding relational autonomy and neural rights into BCI development, tying technological trajectories to governance demands in order to shape responsible paths for future neurotechnologies.
Yuzhang Wu· Theoretical and Natural Scie...· 0 citations
Background: Stroke is one of the leading causes of long-term disability worldwide and is increasingly being reported among young adults, resulting in substantial physical, psychological, and socioeconomic challenges. Although conventional physiotherapy plays a central role in stroke rehabilitation, many individuals with severe motor deficits do not achieve complete functional recovery. In recent years, Brain–Computer Interface (BCI) technology has emerged as a promising adjunct to rehabilitation by directly interpreting brain activity to facilitate movement, promote neuroplasticity, and enhance motor recovery through external assistive devices.
Objective: To review the current evidences on the role of Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) approaches and comparison with conventional physiotherapy in stroke rehabilitation.
Methods: A literature review was performed by searching electronic databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, and Mendeley, for studies published between 2015 and 2025. The search was carried out using keywords related to Brain–Computer Interface (BCI), EEG-based BCI, stroke rehabilitation, neuroplasticity, and neurorehabilitation. Studies were screened according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and 10 relevant articles comprising systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, review articles, and case studies were included for critical appraisal and evidence synthesis.
Results: The Reviewed studies consistently showed that non-invasive EEG-based Brain–Computer Interface (BCI), when used alongside conventional physiotherapy and other rehabilitation approaches such as functional electrical stimulation, robotic-assisted therapy, and virtual reality, was associated with improved upper-limb motor function, motor control, functional independence, and neuroplasticity in individuals with stroke. Several studies also reported that BCI enhanced communication abilities in patients with severe paralysis and locked-in syndrome. While invasive BCI systems offered greater signal accuracy, non-invasive EEG-based BCIs were considered safer, more practical, and better suited for routine clinical rehabilitation.
Conclusion: Based on the reviewed evidences, Brain–Computer Interface (BCI) shows promise as an adjunct to conventional physiotherapy for improving stroke rehabilitation outcomes. Further high-quality studies are needed to establish standardized protocols and confirm its long-term clinical effectiveness.
kumar S Anil, B. Sharvani, M. H· World Journal of Advanced Re...· 0 citations
With the continuous development of artificial intelligence, novel biomaterials, and immersive technologies such as virtual reality, BCIs are expected to evolve toward more personalized, home-based, and intelligent rehabilitation solutions, accelerating their clinical application and offering new therapeutic hope for SCI patients.
Xudong Zhao, Keyi Chen, Jinquan Ma et al.· Spine Research· 0 citations
It is argued that the same handful of bottlenecks recur across all three technologies (long-term stability, neural coding, and equitable access) and the governance frameworks needed alongside continued engineering progress are outlined.
Volodymyr Mavrych, O. Bolgova, Leen Alhamd et al.· Frontiers in Neuroscience· 0 citations
IntroductionBrain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have shown meaningful functional benefits for patients with severe neurologic and neuromuscular disabilities. Pediatric populations with similar conditions may likewise benefit, yet the scope and characteristics of pediatric BCI (pBCI) research remain unclear. We systematically characterize the global clinical trial landscape of pBCI studies to inform clinical and regulatory strategies.MethodsWe conducted a registry-based cross-sectional descriptive analysis of recruiting, ongoing, and planned pBCI clinical trials. ClinicalTrials.gov and 3 international registries were searched using "brain-computer interface," "BCI," "brain-machine interface," "neural interface," "neuroprosthetics," and "EEG-based assistive technology" and limited to participants aged 0-17 years. Two independent reviewers screened records and extracted key study variables, including device type (implanted vs non-implanted), enrollment, duration, phase, and condition studied; discrepancies were resolved by consensus.ResultsEleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Trials encompassed 7 countries. Eight studies evaluated non-implanted devices and 3 for implanted systems. Duration and enrollment differed descriptively between groups. Non-implanted trials had a median duration of 56.0 days (IQR: 42.0-182.6), whereas implanted trials had a median duration of 365.3 days (IQR: 91.3-1826.4 days). Non-implanted trials had a median enrollment of 29 participants (IQR: 19-51.5; range: 8-400), whereas implanted trials had a median enrollment of 8 participants (IQR: 3-30; range: 3-30). Only 4 studies exclusively enrolled pediatric participants; the others recruited both pediatric and adult participants.ConclusionsCurrent pBCI clinical research remains limited in scope, and children may be inadequately prioritized in BCI research.
C. Bobier, Reza Peyravi, D. Hurst· Journal of Child Neurology· 0 citations
This review systematically summarizes the definition, principles, classification, and clinical value of non -invasive EEG‑BCI and invasive implantable BCI and constructs a comprehensive nursing model that includes pre-rehabilitation assessment, intra-training monitoring, complication prevention, psychological intervention, and home -based continuing care.