PURPOSE: Subretinal electrical stimulation (SES) from microphotodiode arrays protects photoreceptors in the RCS rat model of retinitis pigmentosa. The authors examined whether mer(kd) mice, which share a Mertk mutation with RCS rats, showed similar neuroprotective effects from SES. METHODS: Mer(kd) mice were implanted with a microphotodiode array at postnatal day (P) 14. Weekly electroretinograms (ERGs) followed by retinal histology at week 4 were compared with those of age-matched controls. RT-PCR for fibroblast growth factor beta (Fgf2), ciliary nerve trophic factor (Cntf), glial-derived neurotrophic factor (Gdnf), insulin growth factor 1 (Igf1), and glial fibrillary acidic protein (Gfap) was performed on retinas at 1 week after surgery. Rates of degeneration using ERG parameters were compared between mer(kd) mice and RCS rats from P28 to P42. RESULTS: SES-treated mer(kd) mice showed no differences in ERG a- and b-wave amplitudes or photoreceptor numbers compared with controls. However, the expression of Fgf2 and Cntf was greater (6.5 ± 1.9- and 2.5 ± 0.5-fold, respectively; P < 0.02) in SES-treated mer(kd) retinas. Rates of degeneration were faster for dark-adapted maximal b-wave, log σ, and oscillatory potentials in mer(kd) mice than in RCS rats. CONCLUSIONS: Although SES upregulated Fgf2 in mer(kd) retinas, as reported previously for RCS retinas, this was not accompanied by neuroprotection of photoreceptors. Comparisons of ERG responses from mer(kd) mice and RCS rats across different ages showed inner retinal dysfunction in mer(kd) mice but not in RCS rats. This inner retinal dysfunction and the faster rate of degeneration in mer(kd) mice may produce a retinal environment that is not responsive to neuroprotection from SES.
PURPOSE: Subretinal electrical stimulation (SES) from microphotodiode arrays protects photoreceptors in the RCS rat model of retinitis pigmentosa. The authors examined whether mer(kd) mice, which share a Mertk mutation with RCS rats, showed similar neuroprotective effects from SES. METHODS: Mer(kd) mice were implanted with a microphotodiode array at postnatal day (P) 14. Weekly electroretinograms (ERGs) followed by retinal histology at week 4 were compared with those of age-matched controls. RT-PCR for fibroblast growth factor beta (Fgf2), ciliary nerve trophic factor (Cntf), glial-derived neurotrophic factor (Gdnf), insulin growth factor 1 (Igf1), and glial fibrillary acidic protein (Gfap) was performed on retinas at 1 week after surgery. Rates of degeneration using ERG parameters were compared between mer(kd) mice and RCS rats from P28 to P42. RESULTS:SES-treated mer(kd) mice showed no differences in ERG a- and b-wave amplitudes or photoreceptor numbers compared with controls. However, the expression of Fgf2 and Cntf was greater (6.5 ± 1.9- and 2.5 ± 0.5-fold, respectively; P < 0.02) in SES-treated mer(kd) retinas. Rates of degeneration were faster for dark-adapted maximal b-wave, log σ, and oscillatory potentials in mer(kd) mice than in RCS rats. CONCLUSIONS: Although SES upregulated Fgf2 in mer(kd) retinas, as reported previously for RCS retinas, this was not accompanied by neuroprotection of photoreceptors. Comparisons of ERG responses from mer(kd) mice and RCS rats across different ages showed inner retinal dysfunction in mer(kd) mice but not in RCS rats. This inner retinal dysfunction and the faster rate of degeneration in mer(kd) mice may produce a retinal environment that is not responsive to neuroprotection from SES.
Authors: A Y Chow; M T Pardue; V Y Chow; G A Peyman; C Liang; J I Perlman; N S Peachey Journal: IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 3.802
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: 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: 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: 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: Eric C Lawson; Moon K Han; Jana T Sellers; Micah A Chrenek; Adam Hanif; Marissa A Gogniat; Jeffrey H Boatright; Machelle T Pardue Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2014-02-12 Impact factor: 6.167
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: Ranjay Chakraborty; Victoria Yang; Han Na Park; Erica G Landis; Susov Dhakal; Cara T Motz; Michael A Bergen; P Michael Iuvone; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2018-12-31 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: Adam M Hanif; Eric C Lawson; Megan Prunty; Marissa Gogniat; Moe H Aung; Ranjay Chakraborty; Jeffrey H Boatright; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Megan C Prunty; Moe H Aung; Adam M Hanif; Rachael S Allen; Micah A Chrenek; Jeffrey H Boatright; Peter M Thule; Kousik Kundu; Niren Murthy; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Machelle T Pardue; Claire S Barnes; Moon K Kim; Moe H Aung; Raj Amarnath; Darin E Olson; Peter M Thulé Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Mei Li; Douglas Yasumura; Aye Aye K Ma; Michael T Matthes; Haidong Yang; Gregory Nielson; Yong Huang; Francis C Szoka; Matthew M Lavail; Marc I Diamond Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-02-11 Impact factor: 3.240