Table 3 Comparison of the proposed antenna properties with the literature review.

From: Implantable antenna for biomedical applications: electromagnetic, SAR, and thermal performance evaluation

Ref

Frequency (GHz)

Dimensions (mm3)

Substrate material

Gain (dBi)

SAR (W/Kg) for 1 W

Bandwidth impedance %

Implantable tissue

1 g

10 g

20225

2.4

11.6 × 11.6 × 1.27

Rogers 3010

− 28.7

238.1

37.1

31.1

Pork phantom

202319

0.86

1.43

2.6

10 × 10 × 0.125

Rogers 3010

− 26

− 14

− 16

0.409

0.534

0.529

(for 10 mW)

–

181.8

9.58

285.7

Pork muscle

202520

0.915

1.4

2.45

5.8 × 6.0 × 0.254

Rogers 3003

− 31.3

− 25.8

− 21.9

320.4

332.8

464.1

32.5

34.7

49.1

152.7

Homogeneous phantom

202526

1.4

2.45

3 × 4 × 0.5

Rogers 4350B

− 36

− 19.92

376.36

477.3

79.8

82.3

257

74.97

Small intestine of pork

202329

2.45

8.2 × 6.94 × 0.75

Rogers 3010

− 21.6

552

73.2

16.1

Chicken

202230

1.4

2.45

3.5 × 3.5 × 0.26

Rogers 3010

− 29.98 − 33.07

507

436

–

10.69

6.48

Minced pork meat

202331

0.915

2.45

5 × 5 × 0.254

Rogers RT/Duroid 6010LM

− 31.2

− 23.5

–

–

21.8

40.2

Heart muscle gel phantom

202432

2.45

15.5 × 4.5 × 0.085

polyimide

− 34.74

274.2

–

2.2 GHz

pork meat and phantom solution

This work

2.402

4 × 3.5 × 0.254

Rogers RT/Duroid 6010LM

− 28.2

385

–

10.4

Bovine fat

Back to article page