Literature DB >> 19281500

Differences between smooth pursuit and optokinetic eye movements using limited lifetime dot stimulation: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study.

Caroline K L Schraa-Tam1, Aad van der Lugt, Marion Smits, Maarten A Frens, P C A van Broekhoven, Josef N van der Geest.   

Abstract

In this study, we examined possible differences in brain activation between smooth pursuit and optokinetic reflexive (OKR) eye movements using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Eighteen healthy subjects performed two different eye movement paradigms. In the first paradigm, smooth pursuit eye movements were evoked by a single moving dot. In the second paradigm, optokinetic eye movements without a foveal smooth pursuit component were evoked by a moving pattern of multiple dots with a limited lifetime. As expected, the two eye movement systems show overlapping pathways, but the direct comparison of the activation patterns between the two experiments showed that the frontal eye field, MT/V5 and cerebellar area VI appear to be more activated during smooth pursuit than during optokinetic eye movements. These results showed that the smooth pursuit and optokinetic eye movement systems can be differentiated with fMRI using limited lifetime dots as an effective OKR stimulus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19281500     DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-097X.2009.00858.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Physiol Funct Imaging        ISSN: 1475-0961            Impact factor:   2.273


  9 in total

1.  Visual acuity in the short-tailed opossum (Monodelphis domestica).

Authors:  J C Dooley; H M Nguyen; A M H Seelke; L Krubitzer
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2012-08-04       Impact factor: 3.590

2.  Saccadic compensation for reflexive optokinetic nystagmus just as good as compensation for volitional pursuit.

Authors:  James J Harrison; Tom C A Freeman; Petroc Sumner
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-01-26       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Anticipatory smooth eye movements with random-dot kinematograms.

Authors:  Elio M Santos; Edinah K Gnang; Eileen Kowler
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 4.  Psychophysical testing in rodent models of glaucomatous optic neuropathy.

Authors:  Stephanie L Grillo; Peter Koulen
Journal:  Exp Eye Res       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 3.467

5.  Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Oculomotor Dysfunction in Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.

Authors:  Sarah B Rockswold; Philip C Burton; Amy Chang; Nova McNally; Andrea Grant; Gaylan L Rockswold; Walter C Low; Lynn E Eberly; Essa Yacoub; Christophe Lenglet
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 5.269

Review 6.  Visuomotor cerebellum in human and nonhuman primates.

Authors:  Jan Voogd; Caroline K L Schraa-Tam; Jos N van der Geest; Chris I De Zeeuw
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 3.847

7.  Decreased Functional Connectivity of the Primary Visual Cortex and the Correlation With Clinical Features in Patients With Intermittent Exotropia.

Authors:  Xueying He; Jie Hong; Zhaohui Liu; Qian Wang; Ting Li; Xiaoxia Qu; Nanxi Fei; Wei Li; Jing Fu
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2021-03-26       Impact factor: 4.003

8.  Altered brain activity in patients with strabismus and amblyopia detected by analysis of regional homogeneity: A resting‑state functional magnetic resonance imaging study.

Authors:  Yi Shao; Qing-Hai Li; Biao Li; Qi Lin; Ting Su; Wen-Qing Shi; Pei-Wen Zhu; Qing Yuan; Yong-Qiang Shu; Ying He; Wen-Feng Liu; Lei Ye
Journal:  Mol Med Rep       Date:  2019-04-10       Impact factor: 2.952

9.  Disrupted Spontaneous Neural Activity in Patients With Thyroid-Associated Ophthalmopathy: A Resting-State fMRI Study Using Amplitude of Low-Frequency Fluctuation.

Authors:  Wen Chen; Qian Wu; Lu Chen; Jiang Zhou; Huan-Huan Chen; Xiao-Quan Xu; Hao Hu; Fei-Yun Wu
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 3.169

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.