I just watched the video from the link. I highly recommend watching it; it gives a good overview of where we are with BCI (Brain-Computer Interface) and what the possibilities are. The entire presentation was very enlightening and interesting. The pace of development will be frantic over the next 10 years, and once this moves from research to commercial operations, Nexstim’s potential will be massive.
I got the impression that the precise data Nexstim produces in mapping brain function is critical when designing BCI implants for the brain. The Brainlab partnership might turn out to be more valuable than I initially realized, as it opens the right doors. In the long run, it’s not just about whether Brainlab sells 20 or 40 machines, but about the fact that Nexstim is now in the right place at the right time thanks to Brainlab.
When summing up recent events, the signals suggest to me that something bigger is happening:
A sudden large need for capital, even though there supposedly was no need.
Relatively large insider investments. Completely new on this scale.
Brainlab’s additional investment in Nexstim. Brainlab could have bought €4 million worth of shares at a price of €5, but decided to put in more money at a higher price instead.
The first order for 10 devices.
The emergence of BCI (Brain-Computer Interface), where Nexstim is involved.
The first major foreign investor, Eiffel, became interested in Nexstim → They intend to make money; this isn’t about research or charity.
One could probably add more to that list, but those are the ones that came to mind.
The study indicates that neuronavigated TMS can potentially map much more than just traditional motor areas. In short: while traditional methods involve stimulating/measuring movement, this study has succeeded in stimulating/measuring the intention to move.
In brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), leadership does not belong to those who show something first, but to those who can turn it into responsible clinical reality. As Director of the Department of Neurosurgery at TUM Klinikum Rechts der Isar, I am firmly convinced of this.
The new, nearly 30-minute SWR feature “The Power of Thought” (link to the podcast in the comments) demonstrates just how great the potential of BCI technology is – and also what matters most right now:
the ability to turn surgical and scientific possibility into clinical reality. In a structured, robust manner, and with ethical guidelines.
In translational neurotechnology, the pioneering role is not defined by headlines, but by the competence to establish standards, structures, and responsibility. That’s the benchmark by which this field will be measured in the coming years – scientifically, clinically, regulatorily, and socially.
And in my view, this is where the particular role of our Department of Neurosurgery at TUM Klinikum lies.
We are committed to making significant strides in this field and establishing Munich as Europe’s leading hub for BCIs by 2030.
That’s why we’re doing more than just developing individual applications or studies. Together with strong industry partners, we are creating an environment in which surgical precision, scientific depth, AI expertise, data responsibility, and ethical reflection are integrated into a unified development model.
It’s not the individual experiment that matters, but the ability to turn it into a viable system. In my interview with science journalist Dr. Daniela Remus, I put it very bluntly: “If one detail is off, the whole thing falls apart.” That’s exactly how it is.
In BCIs, progress comes from excellence across the entire chain: from imaging, mapping, and navigation to surgical routine and patient selection, all the way through training, follow-up care, and scientific evaluation.
That is precisely why Europe now needs more than visibility.
It needs the ability to shape the future.
It means building environments where this field can be developed in a reproducible, responsible way and with a long-term perspective. For me, that is the core strategic task.
Equally important is the second dimension:
those who advance BCIs also shape the ethical and regulatory standards by which neurotechnology will later be evaluated.
The fact that this perspective is so strong at TUM Klinikum is due to the excellence of our entire team. This is also made clear in the feature through the statements by Simon Jacob and Marcello Ienca.
In addition to translational and scientific depth, the ethical and societal context is always a key consideration. This connection will be crucial in Europe for the acceptance of such technologies and their legitimate and sustainable development.
Many thanks to Dr. Daniela Remus for her nuanced coverage of this important topic and for visiting us in Munich.
Could someone who knows German listen to that podcast and tell those of us without the language skills the key points related to Nexstim? I can, of course, put an AI to work on it sometime later as well.
The case discussed in the talk is “Michi,” who is quadriplegic following a moped accident and 50 surgeries 10 years ago. A chip was implanted in him in the summer of 2025; since October 2025, he has visited the clinic twice a week. Animated training videos are shown on a screen, and following them, Michi does three things (rounds): 1) watches what is being done in the exercise, 2) thinks about what is being done in the exercise, 3) imagines how he would do what is being done in the exercise with his own hand (“In der dritten Runde, soll er sich vorstellen, dass er selbst mit seiner rechten Hand nach dem Ball greift.”). The cognitive effort is interpreted using AI. The goal is for Michi to be able to control a smartphone or a robotic arm via his thoughts. The training session lasts 2 hours, and Michi is exhausted afterward. Michi is not the only patient in the Munich studies, which also include people suffering from speech impairments (“Sprachstörung”) after a stroke. The woman in the talk (presumably Daniel Remus) has followed BCI (Brain-Computer Interface) research for 15 years. During this time, it has moved from “techno-freaks” closer to commercial applications, as devices shrink, computing power increases, and AI advances. Michi is the 50th patient to have this (or a similar) chip implanted. The operation lasted 5 hours. Such operations are only performed on the severely disabled, and this study focuses specifically on the brain area controlling movement; other brain areas are significantly more complex. Now the goal is to take a step toward clinical use. Research began in the US military in the 1970s, and now with AI, development has accelerated tremendously.
Approx. 10–13 min:
In addition to serious (German, ahem) researchers, the US military, the Chinese “government,” and techno-billionaires like Elon Musk are also interested in brain chips to gain a grip on human thoughts. Before this, another BCI variant is briefly introduced; at the Department of Psychology at Julius Maximilian University, they have studied patients since the 1990s who are in a completely paralyzed state, the so-called lock-in syndrome, where the patient can think but move only their eyes or eyelids. This BCI variant is a non-invasive EEG cap, whose electrodes measure the brain’s electrical impulses. This device is less precise than a chip placed via surgery, but the method avoids the operation. Researchers have succeeded in communicating with patients, but progress has been slow due to a lack of funding and patients.
From 13 min onwards, they talk about exoskeletons via EEG-cap BCI and it doesn’t seem to concern Nexstim any further, but I’ll listen to the end in case anything essential comes up.
Is anyone a subscriber to this tabloid? It looks like Terveystalo is commenting on this “mystic” treatment method, but could this be related to Nexstim? Based on the first few lines, it sounds like it might be?