Literature DB >> 30840173

Semi-invasive and non-invasive recording of visual evoked potentials in mice.

Silvia Marenna1, Valerio Castoldi2, Raffaele d'Isa2, Cursi Marco2, Giancarlo Comi1,2, Letizia Leocani3,4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Visual evoked potentials (VEPs) are used to assess visual function in preclinical models of neurodegenerative diseases. VEP recording with epidural screw electrodes is a common method to study visual function in rodents, despite being an invasive procedure that can damage the tissue under the skull. The present study was performed to test a semi-invasive (epicranial) and a non-invasive (epidermal) VEP recording technique, comparing them with the classic epidural acquisition method.
METHODS: Flash VEPs were recorded from C57BL/6 mice on three separate days within 2 weeks. Waveforms, latencies and amplitudes of the components were compared between the three different methods, utilizing coefficient of repeatability, coefficient of variation and intersession standard deviation to evaluate reproducibility.
RESULTS: While epidural electrodes succeeded in recording two negative peaks (N1 and N2), epicranial and epidermal electrodes recorded a single peak (N1). Statistical indexes showed a comparable reproducibility between the three techniques, with a greater stability of N1 latency recorded through epicranial electrodes. Moreover, N1 amplitudes recorded with the new less-invasive methods were more reproducible compared to the invasive gold-standard technique.
CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the reliability of semi- and non-invasive VEP recordings, which can be useful to evaluate murine models of neurological diseases.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Animal welfare; Epicranial electrode; Epidermal electrode; Epidural electrode; Flash visual evoked potentials; Non-invasive electrophysiology

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30840173     DOI: 10.1007/s10633-019-09680-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0012-4486            Impact factor:   2.379


  30 in total

Review 1.  Architecture, Function, and Assembly of the Mouse Visual System.

Authors:  Tania A Seabrook; Timothy J Burbridge; Michael C Crair; Andrew D Huberman
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  2017-07-25       Impact factor: 12.449

2.  Lynx1, a cholinergic brake, limits plasticity in adult visual cortex.

Authors:  Hirofumi Morishita; Julie M Miwa; Nathaniel Heintz; Takao K Hensch
Journal:  Science       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  The visual evoked potential in the mouse--origins and response characteristics.

Authors:  W H Ridder; S Nusinowitz
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2005-10-20       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Reliability, repeatability and reproducibility: analysis of measurement errors in continuous variables.

Authors:  J W Bartlett; C Frost
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 7.299

5.  Visually evoked responses in the rat, guinea pig, cat, monkey, and man.

Authors:  D J Creel; R E Dustman; E C Beck
Journal:  Exp Neurol       Date:  1973-08       Impact factor: 5.330

6.  Ultradian rhythms in the N1-P2 amplitude of the visual evoked potential in two inbred strains of mice: DBA/2J and C57BL/6.

Authors:  A Mazzucchelli; S Conte; F D'Olimpio; F Ferlazzo; A Loizzo; S Palazzesi; P Renzi
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Flash and pattern reversal visual evoked potentials in C57BL/6J and B6CBAF1/J mice.

Authors:  G M Strain; B L Tedford
Journal:  Brain Res Bull       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 4.077

8.  Improving reproducibility of VEP recording in rats: electrodes, stimulus source and peak analysis.

Authors:  Yuyi You; Alexander Klistorner; Johnson Thie; Stuart L Graham
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-09-10       Impact factor: 2.379

9.  Visual evoked potentials of Niemann-Pick type C1 mice reveal an impairment of the visual pathway that is rescued by 2-hydroxypropyl-ß-cyclodextrin.

Authors:  Giampiero Palladino; Stefano Loizzo; Andrea Fortuna; Sonia Canterini; Fioretta Palombi; Robert P Erickson; Franco Mangia; Maria Teresa Fiorenza
Journal:  Orphanet J Rare Dis       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 4.123

10.  Neuroprotection in a novel mouse model of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Katie Lidster; Samuel J Jackson; Zubair Ahmed; Peter Munro; Pete Coffey; Gavin Giovannoni; Mark D Baker; David Baker
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  3 in total

1.  Functional evolution of visual involvement in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis.

Authors:  Silvia Marenna; Su-Chun Huang; Valerio Castoldi; Raffaele d'Isa; Gloria Dalla Costa; Giancarlo Comi; Letizia Leocani
Journal:  Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin       Date:  2020-10-28

2.  Non-invasive visual evoked potentials under sevoflurane versus ketamine-xylazine in rats.

Authors:  Valerio Castoldi; Raffaele d'Isa; Silvia Marenna; Giancarlo Comi; Letizia Leocani
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2021-11-09

3.  Visual Evoked Potentials to Monitor Myelin Cuprizone-Induced Functional Changes.

Authors:  Silvia Marenna; Su-Chun Huang; Gloria Dalla Costa; Raffaele d'Isa; Valerio Castoldi; Elena Rossi; Giancarlo Comi; Letizia Leocani
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-04-15       Impact factor: 5.152

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.