PURPOSE: Subretinal prosthetics are designed to electrically stimulate second-order cells, replacing dysfunctional photoreceptors in diseases such as retinitis pigmentosa (RP). For functional vision to occur, this signal must also reach central visual structures. In the current study, a subretinally implanted prosthetic was evaluated in the Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) rat model of RP, to determine its capacity to activate the retinotectal pathway. METHODS: Prosthetic implants were placed in RCS and wild-type (WT) rats at 4 weeks of age and evaluated 3 months later. Control rats underwent sham surgery, implantation with inactive prosthetics, or no treatment. Implant- and visible-evoked responses were isolated and evaluated in the superior colliculus (SC). RESULTS: In WT and RCS rats with active prosthetics, implant-driven responses were found in 100% of WT and 64% of RCS rats and were confined to a small SC region that corresponded to the retinal sector containing the implant and differed from visible-evoked responses. In addition, visible-evoked responses were more robust at sites that received implant input compared to sites that did not. These effects were not seen in WT rats or RCS control animals; although a general trophic effect on the number of responsive sites was observed in all RCS rats with surgery compared to untreated RCS rats. CONCLUSIONS: Direct activation of the retina by a subretinal implant induces activity in the SC of RCS rats, suggesting that these implants have some capacity to replace dysfunctional photoreceptors. The data also provide evidence for implant-induced neurotrophic effects as a consequence of both its presence and its activity in the retina.
PURPOSE: Subretinal prosthetics are designed to electrically stimulate second-order cells, replacing dysfunctional photoreceptors in diseases such as retinitis pigmentosa (RP). For functional vision to occur, this signal must also reach central visual structures. In the current study, a subretinally implanted prosthetic was evaluated in the Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) rat model of RP, to determine its capacity to activate the retinotectal pathway. METHODS: Prosthetic implants were placed in RCS and wild-type (WT) rats at 4 weeks of age and evaluated 3 months later. Control rats underwent sham surgery, implantation with inactive prosthetics, or no treatment. Implant- and visible-evoked responses were isolated and evaluated in the superior colliculus (SC). RESULTS: In WT and RCS rats with active prosthetics, implant-driven responses were found in 100% of WT and 64% of RCS rats and were confined to a small SC region that corresponded to the retinal sector containing the implant and differed from visible-evoked responses. In addition, visible-evoked responses were more robust at sites that received implant input compared to sites that did not. These effects were not seen in WT rats or RCS control animals; although a general trophic effect on the number of responsive sites was observed in all RCS rats with surgery compared to untreated RCS rats. CONCLUSIONS: Direct activation of the retina by a subretinal implant induces activity in the SC of RCS rats, suggesting that these implants have some capacity to replace dysfunctional photoreceptors. The data also provide evidence for implant-induced neurotrophic effects as a consequence of both its presence and its activity in the retina.
Authors: Machelle T Pardue; Tiffany A Walker; Amanda E Faulkner; Moon K Kim; Christopher M Bonner; George Y McLean Journal: Adv Exp Med Biol Date: 2008 Impact factor: 2.622
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
Authors: Vincent T Ciavatta; Moon Kim; Paul Wong; John M Nickerson; R Keith Shuler; George Y McLean; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2009-03-05 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Adewumi N Adekunle; Alice Adkins; Wei Wang; Henry J Kaplan; Juan Fernandez de Castro; Sang Joon Lee; Philip Huie; Daniel Palanker; Maureen McCall; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Adam M Hanif; Moon K Kim; Joel G Thomas; Vincent T Ciavatta; Micah Chrenek; John R Hetling; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2016-06-18 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: Machelle T Pardue; Moon K Kim; Tiffany A Walker; Amanda E Faulkner; Alan Y Chow; Vincent T Ciavatta Journal: Adv Exp Med Biol Date: 2012 Impact factor: 2.622
Authors: Shawn K Kelly; Douglas B Shire; Jinghua Chen; Patrick Doyle; Marcus D Gingerich; Stuart F Cogan; William A Drohan; Luke S Theogarajan; John L Wyatt; Joseph F Rizzo Journal: Biomed Signal Process Control Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 3.880