Literature DB >> 10479021

Development of a silicon retinal implant: cortical evoked potentials following focal stimulation of the rabbit retina with light and electricity.

M N Nadig1.   

Abstract

There are currently many experimental efforts to develop a treatment for retinitis pigmentosa (RP) and age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The efforts reported here are part of the Retinal Implant Project, a collaborative effort of the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, to develop an independent functioning epiretinal prosthesis to restore vision in patients with disease of the outer retina such as RP and AMD. The epiretinal prosthesis will electrically stimulate the inner retina, bypass the damaged photoreceptors, and hopefully result in meaningful vision. One way to monitor the epiretinal implant is to record focal (stimulation of a small area of retina) evoked cortical potentials (EEP) upon electrical current stimulation. EEP recordings have 3 uses: (1) verify that focal retinal electrical stimulation sends a signal to the cortex that is similar to that elicited by light; (2) develop an animal model to chronically monitor the epiretinal implant; and (3) investigate optimal stimulus parameters. Five dutch pelted rabbits were placed under anesthesia and a 250 microm concentric bipolar stimulating electrode was introduced on the vitreal surface of the retina under visual guidance to record the EEP. Stimuli were charge-balanced pulses and recording electrodes were extradural. Focal VEPs were also recorded and compared to the focal EEP to ascertain cortical origin of the EEP, determine similarities of the EEP to the VEP and determine focality of electrical stimulus. EEP recordings were elicited in 3 out of the 5 rabbits. Current amplitudes which produced detectable responses ranged from 50-1000 microA. In our best series, amplitudes increased by 47-206 microV in increasing current from 50-600 microA. In comparing latencies of the focal EEP and focal VEP, the EEP latencies were 60-70 ms faster, favoring a cortical signal origin. In comparing amplitudes, VEP and EEP responses behaved similarly with changes in stimulus strength and stimulating frequency. In conclusion, EEPs were obtained with parameters of electrode size and current threshold level that would be used by the epiretinal implant, enabling use of the EEP response to monitor the epiretinal implant.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10479021     DOI: 10.1016/s1388-2457(99)00027-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol        ISSN: 1388-2457            Impact factor:   3.708


  10 in total

1.  Direct stimulation of optic nerve by electrodes implanted in optic disc of rabbit eyes.

Authors:  Xiaoyun Fang; Hirokazu Sakaguchi; Takashi Fujikado; Makoto Osanai; Hiroyuki Kanda; Yasushi Ikuno; Motohiro Kamei; Masahito Ohji; Dekang Gan; Junsub Choi; Tetsuya Yagi; Yasuo Tano
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-09-17       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  The value of preoperative tests in the selection of blind patients for a permanent microelectronic implant.

Authors:  Douglas Yanai; Rohit R Lakhanpal; James D Weiland; Manjunatha Mahadevappa; Gretchen Van Boemel; Gildo Y Fujii; Robert Greenberg; Sean Caffey; Eugene de Juan; Mark S Humayun
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2003

3.  Repeated transchoroidal implantation and explantation of compound subretinal prostheses: an exploratory study in rabbits.

Authors:  Florian Gekeler; Karin Kobuch; Georgios Blatsios; Eberhart Zrenner; Kei Shinoda
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-11-05       Impact factor: 2.447

Review 4.  A review of in vivo animal studies in retinal prosthesis research.

Authors:  Dimiter R Bertschinger; Evgueny Beknazar; Manuel Simonutti; Avinoam B Safran; José A Sahel; Serge G Rosolen; Serge Picaud; Joel Salzmann
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-08-16       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Electrically elicited visual evoked potentials in Argus II retinal implant wearers.

Authors:  H Christiaan Stronks; Michael P Barry; Gislin Dagnelie
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Transretinal electrical stimulation by an intrascleral multichannel electrode array in rabbit eyes.

Authors:  Kazuaki Nakauchi; Takashi Fujikado; Hiroyuki Kanda; Takeshi Morimoto; Jun S Choi; Yasushi Ikuno; Hirokazu Sakaguchi; Motohiro Kamei; Masahito Ohji; Tohru Yagi; Shigeru Nishimura; Hajime Sawai; Yutaka Fukuda; Yasuo Tano
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-12-07       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  In Vivo Photovoltaic Performance of a Silicon Nanowire Photodiode-Based Retinal Prosthesis.

Authors:  Brandon Bosse; Samir Damle; Abraham Akinin; Yi Jing; Dirk-Uwe Bartsch; Lingyun Cheng; Nicholas Oesch; Yu-Hwa Lo; Gert Cauwenberghs; William R Freeman
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 4.799

8.  Behavioral and electrophysiological effects of cortical microstimulation parameters.

Authors:  Bilal A Bari; Douglas R Ollerenshaw; Daniel C Millard; Qi Wang; Garrett B Stanley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Cortical responses elicited by photovoltaic subretinal prostheses exhibit similarities to visually evoked potentials.

Authors:  Yossi Mandel; Georges Goetz; Daniel Lavinsky; Philip Huie; Keith Mathieson; Lele Wang; Theodore Kamins; Ludwig Galambos; Richard Manivanh; James Harris; Daniel Palanker
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Probing the functional impact of sub-retinal prosthesis.

Authors:  Sébastien Roux; Frédéric Matonti; Florent Dupont; Louis Hoffart; Sylvain Takerkart; Serge Picaud; Pascale Pham; Frédéric Chavane
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 8.140

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.