Temporal interactions during paired-electrode stimulation in two retinal prosthesis subjects

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 52, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 549-557

  Horsager, Alan ^a   Boynton, Geoffrey M ^b   Greenberg, Robert J ^c   Fine, Ione ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^c Second Sight Medical Products Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRIGHTNESS; CASE REPORT; CLINICAL TRIAL; ELECTRODE; ELECTROSTIMULATION; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; FACILITATION; HUMAN; PERCEPTIVE THRESHOLD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETINAL PROSTHESIS; TIME PERCEPTION; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL PROSTHESIS; VISUAL STIMULATION; IMPLANTATION; LIGHT; MICROELECTRODE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; RETINA; RETINITIS PIGMENTOSA; VISION;

ELECTRODES, IMPLANTED; HUMANS; LIGHT; MICROELECTRODES; MIDDLE AGED; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; RETINA; RETINITIS PIGMENTOSA; SENSORY THRESHOLDS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 79952473700     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.10-5282     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Bunker CH, Berson EL, Bromley WC, Hayes RP, Roderick TH. Prevalence of retinitis pigmentosa in Maine. Am J Ophthalmol. 1984;97:357-365.
2. Heckenlively JR, Foxman SG, Parelhoff ES. Retinal dystrophy and macular coloboma. Doc Ophthalmol. 1988;68:257-271.
3. Chader GJ. Animal models in research on retinal degenerations: past progress and future hope. Vision Res. 2002;42:393-399.
4. Congdon N, O'Colmain B, Klaver CC, et al. Causes and prevalence of visual impairment among adults in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122:477-485.
5. Marc RE, Jones BW. Retinal remodeling in inherited photoreceptor degenerations. Mol Neurobiol. 2003;28:139-147.
6. Jones BW, Watt CB, Marc RE. Retinal remodelling. Clin Exp Optom. 2005;88:282-291.
7. Mazzoni F, Novelli E, Strettoi E. Retinal ganglion cells survive and maintain normal dendritic morphology in a mouse model of inherited photoreceptor degeneration. J Neurosci. 2008;28:14282-14292.
8. Santos A, Humayun MS, de Juan E Jr, et al. Preservation of the inner retina in retinitis pigmentosa: a morphometric analysis. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:511-515.
9. Humayun MS, Prince M, de Juan E Jr, et al. Morphometric analysis of the extramacular retina from postmortem eyes with retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40:143-148.
10. Lagali PS, Balya D, Awatramani GB, et al. Light-activated channels targeted to ON bipolar cells restore visual function in retinal degeneration. Nat Neurosci. 2008;11:667-675.
11. Margolis DJ, Newkirk G, Euler T, Detwiler PB. Functional stability of retinal ganglion cells after degeneration-induced changes in synaptic input. J Neurosci. 2008;28:6526-6536.
12. Stasheff SF. Emergence of sustained spontaneous hyperactivity and temporary preservation of OFF responses in ganglion cells of the retinal degeneration (rd1) mouse. J Neurophysiol. 2008;99:1408-1421.
13. Bainbridge JW, Smith AJ, Barker SS, et al. Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Leber's congenital amaurosis. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2231-2239.
14. Hauswirth WW, Aleman TS, Kaushal S, et al. Treatment of leber congenital amaurosis due to RPE65 mutations by ocular subretinal injection of adeno-associated virus gene vector: short-term results of a phase I trial. Hum Gene Ther. 2008;19:979-990.
15. Cideciyan AV, Aleman TS, Boye SL, et al. Human gene therapy for RPE65 isomerase deficiency activates the retinoid cycle of vision but with slow rod kinetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105: 15112-15117.
16. Cideciyan AV, Hauswirth WW, Aleman TS, et al. Human RPE65 gene therapy for Leber congenital amaurosis: persistence of early visual improvements and safety at 1 year. Hum Gene Ther. 2009; 20:999-1004.
17. Cideciyan AV, Hauswirth WW, Aleman TS, et al. Vision 1 year after gene therapy for Leber's congenital amaurosis. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:725-727.
18. Banghart M, Borges K, Isacoff E, Trauner D, Kramer RH. Lightactivated ion channels for remote control of neuronal firing. Nat Neurosci. 2004;7:1381-1386.
19. Chambers JJ, Banghart MR, Trauner D, Kramer RH. Light-induced depolarization of neurons using a modified Shaker K() channel and a molecular photoswitch. J Neurophysiol. 2006;96:2792-2796.
20. Szobota S, Gorostiza P, Del Bene F, et al. Remote control of neuronal activity with a light-gated glutamate receptor. Neuron. 2007;54:535-545.
21. Nagel G, Szellas T, Huhn W, et al. Channel rhodopsin-2, a directly light-gated cation-selective membrane channel. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:13940-13945.
22. Boyden ES, Zhang F, Bamberg E, Nagel G, Deisseroth K. Millisecond- timescale, genetically targeted optical control of neural activity. Nat Neurosci. 2005;8:1263-1268.
23. Bi A, Cui J, Ma YP, et al. Ectopic expression of a microbial-type rhodopsin restores visual responses in mice with photoreceptor degeneration. Neuron. 2006;50:23-33.
24. Lin B, Koizumi A, Tanaka N, Panda S, Masland RH. Restoration of visual function in retinal degeneration mice by ectopic expression of melanopsin. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105:16009-16014.
25. Daiger SP, Bowne SJ, Sullivan LS. Perspective on genes and mutations causing retinitis pigmentosa. Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125: 151-158.
26. Schnapf JL, Kraft TW, Baylor DA. Spectral sensitivity of human cone photoreceptors. Nature. 1987;325:439-441.
27. Wang H, Peca J, Matsuzaki M, et al. High-speed mapping of synaptic connectivity using photostimulation in Channelrhodopsin-2 transgenic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104:8143-8148.
28. Humayun MS, de Juan E Jr, Weiland JD, et al. Pattern electrical stimulation of the human retina. Vision Res. 1999;39:2569-2576.
29. Rizzo JF, III, Wyatt J, Loewenstein J, Kelly S, Shire D. Perceptual efficacy of electrical stimulation of human retina with a microelectrode array during short-term surgical trials. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:5362-5369.
30. Weiland JD, Yanai D, Mahadevappa M, et al. Visual task performance in blind humans with retinal prosthetic implants. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2004;6:4172-4173.
31. Yanai D, Weiland JD, Mahadevappa M, Greenberg RJ, Fine I, Humayun MS. Visual performance using a retinal prosthesis in three subjects with retinitis pigmentosa. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007; 143:820-827.
32. Zrenner E. Subretinal Implants for the Restitution of Vision in Blind Patients. Presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, May 6, 2007
33. de Balthasar C, Patel S, Roy A, et al. Factors affecting perceptual thresholds in epiretinal prostheses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:2303-2314.
34. Greenwald SH, Horsager A, Humayun MS, Greenberg RJ, McMahon MJ, Fine I. Brightness as a function of current amplitude in human retinal electrical stimulation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50: 5017-5025.
35. Horsager A, Greenberg RJ, Fine I. Spatiotemporal interactions in retinal prosthesis subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51: 1223-1233.
36. Horsager A, Greenwald SH, Weiland JD, et al. Predicting visual sensitivity in retinal prosthesis patients. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:1483-1491.
37. Chader GJ, Weiland J, Humayun MS. Artificial vision: needs, functioning, and testing of a retinal electronic prosthesis. Prog Brain Res. 2009;175:317-332.
38. Stevens SS. On the psychophysical law. Psychol Rev. 1957;64:153-181.
39. Watson AB. Temporal Sensitivity. In: Boff K, Kaufman L, Thomas J, eds. Handbook of Perception and Human Performance. New York: Wiley; 1986.
40. Boex C, de Balthasar C, Kos MI, Pelizzone M. Electrical field interactions in different cochlear implant systems. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003;114:2049-2057.
41. Stickney GS, Loizou PC, Mishra LN, Assmann PF, Shannon RV, Opie JM. Effects of electrode design and configuration on channel interactions. Hear Res. 2006;211:33-45.
42. Wilson BS, Finley CC, Lawson DT, Wolford RD, Zerbi M. Design and evaluation of a continuous interleaved sampling (CIS) processing strategy for multichannel cochlear implants. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1993;30:110.
43. de Balthasar C, Boex C, Cosendai G, Valentini G, Sigrist A, Pelizzone M. Channel interactions with high-rate biphasic electrical stimulation in cochlear implant subjects. Hear Res. 2003;182:77-87.
44. Humayun MS, Weiland JD, Fujii GY, et al. Visual perception in a blind subject with a chronic microelectronic retinal prosthesis. Vision Res. 2003;43:2573-2581.
45. Mahadevappa M, Weiland JD, Yanai D, Fine I, Greenberg RJ, Humayun MS. Perceptual thresholds and electrode impedance in three retinal prosthesis subjects. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2005;13:201-206.
46. Loeb GE, White MW, Jenkins WM. Biophysical considerations in electrical stimulation of the auditory nervous system. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1983;405:123-136.
47. Jensen RJ, Ziv OR, Rizzo JF. Responses of rabbit retinal ganglion cells to electrical stimulation with an epiretinal electrode. J Neural Eng. 2005;2:S16-S21.
48. Wichmann FA, Hill NJ. The psychometric function: II. Bootstrapbased confidence intervals and sampling. Percept Psychophys. 2001;63:1314-1329.
49. Rashbass C. The visibility of transient changes of luminance. J Physiol. 1970;210:165-186.
50. Nanduri D, Humayun MS, Greenberg RJ, McMahon MJ, Weiland JD. Retinal prosthesis phosphene shape analysis. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2008;2008:1785-1788.
51. Amthor FR, Tootle JS, Grzywacz NM. Stimulus-dependent correlated firing in directionally selective retinal ganglion cells. Vis Neurosci. 2005;22:769-787.
52. Baccus SA. Timing and computation in inner retinal circuitry. Annu Rev Physiol. 2007;69:271-290.
53. Fried SI, Hsueh HA, Werblin FS. A method for generating precise temporal patterns of retinal spiking using prosthetic stimulation. J Neurophysiol. 2006;95:970-978.
54. Sekirnjak C, Hottowy P, Sher A, Dabrowski W, Litke AM, Chichilnisky EJ. High-resolution electrical stimulation of primate retina for epiretinal implant design. J Neurosci. 2008;28:4446-4456.
55. Shady S, MacLeod DI, Fisher HS. Adaptation from invisible flicker. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101:5170-5173.