PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that subretinal electrical stimulation from a microphotodiode array (MPA) exerts a neuroprotective effect in Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) rats through the induction of growth factors. METHODS: At postnatal day 21, RCS rats were divided into four groups in which one eye per rat received treatment: (A) active MPA, (M) minimally active MPA, (S) sham surgery, or (C) no surgery and the opposite eye was unoperated. Dark- and light-adapted ERGs were recorded 1 week after surgery. A second set of A-, M-, and C-treated RCS rats had weekly ERG recordings for 4 weeks. Real-time RT-PCR was used to measure relative expression of mRNAs (Bdnf, Fgf2, Fgf1, Cntf, Gdnf, and Igf1) in retina samples collected 2 days after the final ERG. RESULTS: One week after surgery, there was a slight difference in dark-adapted ERG b-wave at the brightest flash intensity. Mean retinal Fgf2 expression in the treated eye relative to the opposite eye was greater for the A group (4.67 +/- 0.72) than for the M group (2.80 +/- 0.45; P = 0.0501), S group (2.03 +/- 0.45; P < 0.01), and C group (1.30 +/- 0.22; P < 0.001). No significant change was detected for Bdnf, Cntf, Fgf1, Gdnf, and Igf1. Four weeks after surgery, the A group had significantly larger dark- and light-adapted ERG b-waves than for the M and C groups (P < 0.01). Simultaneously, mean relative Fgf2 expression was again greater for the A group (3.28 +/- 0.61) than for the M (1.28 +/- 0.32; P < 0.05) and C (1.05 +/- 0.04; P < 0.05) groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results show subretinal implantation of an MPA induces selective expression of Fgf2 above that expected from a retina-piercing injury. Preservation of ERG b-wave amplitude 4 weeks after implantation is accompanied by elevated Fgf2 expression. These results suggest that Fgf2 may play a role in the neuroprotection provided by subretinal electrical stimulation.
PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that subretinal electrical stimulation from a microphotodiode array (MPA) exerts a neuroprotective effect in Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) rats through the induction of growth factors. METHODS: At postnatal day 21, RCS rats were divided into four groups in which one eye per rat received treatment: (A) active MPA, (M) minimally active MPA, (S) sham surgery, or (C) no surgery and the opposite eye was unoperated. Dark- and light-adapted ERGs were recorded 1 week after surgery. A second set of A-, M-, and C-treated RCS rats had weekly ERG recordings for 4 weeks. Real-time RT-PCR was used to measure relative expression of mRNAs (Bdnf, Fgf2, Fgf1, Cntf, Gdnf, and Igf1) in retina samples collected 2 days after the final ERG. RESULTS: One week after surgery, there was a slight difference in dark-adapted ERG b-wave at the brightest flash intensity. Mean retinal Fgf2 expression in the treated eye relative to the opposite eye was greater for the A group (4.67 +/- 0.72) than for the M group (2.80 +/- 0.45; P = 0.0501), S group (2.03 +/- 0.45; P < 0.01), and C group (1.30 +/- 0.22; P < 0.001). No significant change was detected for Bdnf, Cntf, Fgf1, Gdnf, and Igf1. Four weeks after surgery, the A group had significantly larger dark- and light-adapted ERG b-waves than for the M and C groups (P < 0.01). Simultaneously, mean relative Fgf2 expression was again greater for the A group (3.28 +/- 0.61) than for the M (1.28 +/- 0.32; P < 0.05) and C (1.05 +/- 0.04; P < 0.05) groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results show subretinal implantation of an MPA induces selective expression of Fgf2 above that expected from a retina-piercing injury. Preservation of ERG b-wave amplitude 4 weeks after implantation is accompanied by elevated Fgf2 expression. These results suggest that Fgf2 may play a role in the neuroprotection provided by subretinal electrical stimulation.
Authors: Jeffrey H Boatright; Anisha G Moring; Clinton McElroy; Michael J Phillips; Vi T Do; Bo Chang; Norm L Hawes; Amber P Boyd; Sheree S Sidney; Rachael E Stewart; Steven C Minear; Rajashree Chaudhury; Vincent T Ciavatta; Cecilia M P Rodrigues; Clifford J Steer; John M Nickerson; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Mol Vis Date: 2006-12-29 Impact factor: 2.367
Authors: Paul A Sieving; Rafael C Caruso; Weng Tao; Hanna R Coleman; Darby J S Thompson; Keri R Fullmer; Ronald A Bush Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-02-27 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Machelle T Pardue; Michael J Phillips; Hang Yin; Brian D Sippy; Sarah Webb-Wood; Alan Y Chow; Sherry L Ball Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: P M D'Cruz; D Yasumura; J Weir; M T Matthes; H Abderrahim; M M LaVail; D Vollrath Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2000-03-01 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Abby Leigh Manthey; Wei Liu; Zhi Xin Jiang; Marcus Hiu Kong Lee; Jian Ji; Kwok-Fai So; Jimmy Shiu Ming Lai; Vincent Wing Hong Lee; Kin Chiu Journal: Cell Transplant Date: 2017-02-03 Impact factor: 4.064
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: T Röck; A Schatz; L Naycheva; M Gosheva; J Pach; B Wilhelm; T Peters; K U Bartz-Schmidt; E Zrenner; G Willmann; F Gekeler Journal: Ophthalmologe Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 1.059
Authors: Moe H Aung; Moon K Kim; Darin E Olson; Peter M Thule; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2013-02-15 Impact factor: 4.799