An in-vivo paradigm for the evaluation of stimulating electrodes for use with a visual prosthesis

ANZ Journal of Surgery

Volumn 74, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 372-378

  Chowdhury, Vivek ^a,c   Morley, John W ^b   Coroneo, Minas T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^c NONE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cat; Corpus callosum; Electrode; Implanted; Neuronal stimulation; Phosphene

Indexed keywords

AMPLITUDE MODULATION; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; BRAIN CORTEX; BRAIN DEPTH STIMULATION; CAT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORPUS CALLOSUM; CRANIOTOMY; DURA MATER; ELECTRODE; ELECTROSTIMULATION; EVOKED CORTICAL RESPONSE; HEMISPHERE; IN VIVO STUDY; NONHUMAN; POLARIZATION; VISUAL PROSTHESIS;

ANIMALS; CATS; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; ELECTRODES, IMPLANTED; PHOSPHENES; VISUAL CORTEX;

EID: 2542614417     PISSN: 14451433     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1445-1433.2004.02983.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Heiduschka P, Thanos S. Implantable bioelectric interfaces for lost nerve functions. Prog. Neurobiol. 1998; 55: 433-61.
2. [no author]. Cochlear implants in adults and children: summary of the NIH consensus. Office of Medical Applications of Research, National Institutes of Health. Aust. N. Z. J. Surg. 1997; 67: 379-80.
3. Kusumoto FM, Goldschlager N. Device therapy for cardiac arrhythmias. JAMA 2002; 287: 1848-52.
4. Dimitrijevic MM, Dimitrijevic MR. Clinical elements for the neuromuscular stimulation and functional electrical stimulation protocols in the practice of neurorehabilitation. Artif. Organs 2002; 26: 256-9.
5. Mitchell RN, Cotran RS. Repair: cell regeneration, fibrosis, and wound healing. In: Kumar V, Cotran RS, Robbins SL (eds). Basic Pathology. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders, 1997; chapter 3.
6. Kruger GM, Morrison SJ. Brain repair by endogenous progenitors. Cell 2002; 110: 399-402.
7. Isacson O. The production and use of cells as therapeutic agents in neurodegenerative diseases. Lancet Neurol. 2003; 2: 417-24.
8. Bjorklund A, Dunnett SB, Brundin P et al. Neural transplantation for the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Lancet Neurol. 2003; 2: 437-45.
9. Finn WE, LoPresti PG. Handbook of Neuroprosthetic Methods. Boca Raton: CRC Press 2003.
10. Jayakar P. Physiological principles of electrical stimulation. Adv. Neurol. 1993; 63: 17-27.
11. Scarlatis G. Optical prosthesis: visions of the future. JAMA 2000; 283: 2297.
12. Maynard EM. Visual prostheses. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2001; 3: 145-68.
13. Brindley GS, Lewin WS. The sensations produced by electrical stimulation of the visual cortex. J. Physiol. 1968; 196: 479-93.
14. Dobelle WH. Artificial vision for the blind by connecting a television camera to the visual cortex. ASAIO J. 2000; 46: 3-9.
15. US Food and Drug Administration - Center for Devices and Radiological Health. New Device Approvals: Nucleus 24 Auditory Brainstem Implant System. US Food and Drug Administration - Center for Devices and Radiological Health, [updated 27 March 2001; cited 9 March 2004]. Available from: http:// www.fda.gov/cdrh/mda/docs/p000015.pdf
16. Davis R, Patrick J, Barriskill A. Development of functional electrical stimulators utilizing cochlear implant technology. Med. Eng. Physics 2001; 23: 61-8.
17. Kawamura K. Corticocortical fiber connections of the cat cerebrum. 2. The parietal region. Brain Res. 1973; 51: 23-40.
18. Curtis HJ. Intercortical connections of corpus callosum as indicated by evoked potentials. J. Neurophysiol. 1940; 3: 405-13.
19. Curtis HJ. An analysis of cortical potentials mediated by the corpus callosum. J. Neurophysiol. 1940; 3: 414-21.
20. Chang HT. Cortical response to activity of callosal neurons. J. Neurophysiol. 1953; 16: 117-31.
21. Testerman RL. The cortical response to callosal stimulation: a model for determining safe and efficient stimulus parameters. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 1978; 6: 438-52.
22. Geddes LA, Bourland JD. The strength-duration curve. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 1985; 32: 458-9.
23. Davis R, Houdayer T, Andrews B, Emmons S, Patrick J. Paraplegia: prolonged closed-loop standing with implanted nucleus FES-22 stimulator and Andrews' foot-ankle orthosis. Stereotact. Funct. Neurosurg. 1997; 69: 281-7.
24. Lomber SG, Payne BR. Contributions of cat posterior parietal cortex to visuospatial discrimination. Vis. Neurosci. 2000; 17: 701-9.
25. Pigarev IN, Rodionova EI. Two visual areas located in the middle suprasylvian gyrus (cytoarchitectonic field 7) of the cat's cortex. Neuroscience 1998; 85: 717-32.
26. Field HE, Taylor ME. An Atlas of Cat Anatomy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969.
27. Segraves MA, Rosenquist AC. The distribution of the cells of origin of callosal projections in cat visual cortex. J. Neurosci. 1982; 2: 1079-89.
28. Payne BR. Visual-field map in the transcallosal sending zone of area 17 in the cat. Vis. Neurosci. 1991; 7: 201-19.
29. Peacock SM. Activity of anterior suprasylvian gyrus in response to transcallosal afferent volleys. J. Neurophysiol. 1957; 20: 140-55.
30. Dobelle WH, Turkel J, Henderson DC, Evans JR. Mapping the representation of the visual field by electrical stimulation of human visual cortex. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 1979; 88: 727-35.
31. Yeomans JS. Principles of Brain Stimulation. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.