Literature DB >> 25426958

Activation and inhibition of retinal ganglion cells in response to epiretinal electrical stimulation: a computational modelling study.

Miganoosh Abramian1, Nigel H Lovell, John W Morley, Gregg J Suaning, Socrates Dokos.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Retinal prosthetic devices aim to restore sight in visually impaired people by means of electrical stimulation of surviving retinal ganglion cells (RGCs). This modelling study aims to demonstrate that RGC inhibition caused by high-intensity cathodic pulses greatly influences their responses to epiretinal electrical stimulation and to investigate the impact of this inhibition on spatial activation profiles as well as their implications for retinal prosthetic device design. Another aim is to take advantage of this inhibition to reduce axonal activation in the nerve fibre layer. APPROACH: A three-dimensional finite-element model of epiretinal electrical stimulation was utilized to obtain RGC activation and inhibition threshold profiles for a range of parameters. MAIN
RESULTS: RGC activation and inhibition thresholds were highly dependent on cell and stimulus parameters. Activation thresholds were 1.5, 3.4 and 11.3 μA for monopolar electrodes with 5, 20 and 50 μm radii, respectively. Inhibition to activation threshold ratios were mostly within the range 2-10. Inhibition significantly altered spatial patterns of RGC activation. With concentric electrodes and appropriately high levels of stimulus amplitudes, activation of passing axons was greatly reduced. SIGNIFICANCE: RGC inhibition significantly impacts their spatial activation profiles, and therefore it most likely influences patterns of perceived phosphenes induced by retinal prosthetic devices. Thus this inhibition should be taken into account in future studies concerning retinal prosthesis development. It might be possible to utilize this inhibitory effect to bypass activation of passing axons and selectively stimulate RGCs near their somas and dendrites to achieve more localized phosphenes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25426958     DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/12/1/016002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neural Eng        ISSN: 1741-2552            Impact factor:   5.379


  7 in total

1.  Activation of ganglion cells and axon bundles using epiretinal electrical stimulation.

Authors:  Lauren E Grosberg; Karthik Ganesan; Georges A Goetz; Sasidhar S Madugula; Nandita Bhaskhar; Victoria Fan; Peter Li; Pawel Hottowy; Wladyslaw Dabrowski; Alexander Sher; Alan M Litke; Subhasish Mitra; E J Chichilnisky
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Increasing Electrical Stimulation Efficacy in Degenerated Retina: Stimulus Waveform Design in a Multiscale Computational Model.

Authors:  Kyle Loizos; Robert Marc; Mark Humayun; James R Anderson; Bryan W Jones; Gianluca Lazzi
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 3.802

3.  On the computation of a retina resistivity profile for applications in multi-scale modeling of electrical stimulation and absorption.

Authors:  Kyle Loizos; Anil Kumar RamRakhyani; James Anderson; Robert Marc; Gianluca Lazzi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  A Patient-Specific Computational Framework for the Argus II Implant.

Authors:  Kathleen E Finn; Hans J Zander; Robert D Graham; Scott F Lempka; James D Weiland
Journal:  IEEE Open J Eng Med Biol       Date:  2020-06-11

5.  High-amplitude electrical stimulation can reduce elicited neuronal activity in visual prosthesis.

Authors:  Alejandro Barriga-Rivera; Tianruo Guo; Chih-Yu Yang; Amr Al Abed; Socrates Dokos; Nigel H Lovell; John W Morley; Gregg J Suaning
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Minimizing activation of overlying axons with epiretinal stimulation: The role of fiber orientation and electrode configuration.

Authors:  Timothy B Esler; Robert R Kerr; Bahman Tahayori; David B Grayden; Hamish Meffin; Anthony N Burkitt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Somatic inhibition by microscopic magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Hui Ye; Lauryn Barrett
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.