Visual cortex responses to single- and simultaneous multiple-electrode stimulation of the retina: Implications for retinal prostheses

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 53, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 6291-6300

  Shivdasani, Mohit N ^a   Fallon, James B ^a   Luu, Chi D ^b   Cicione, Rosemary ^a   Allen, Penny J ^b   Morley, John W ^c   Williams, Chris E ^a  

^a BIONICS INSTITUTE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PLATINUM;

ADRENAL CORTEX; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CAT; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; ELECTROSTIMULATION; MULTIPLE ELECTRODE STIMULATION; NONHUMAN; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETINA; RETINA FOVEA; SINGLE ELECTRODE STIMULATION; STRIATE CORTEX; VISUAL PROSTHESIS; WAVEFORM; ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; ANIMAL MODEL; CHOROID; ELECTRODE IMPLANT; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PROSTHESIS; SCLERA; VISUAL CORTEX;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; CATS; CHOROID; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; ELECTRODES, IMPLANTED; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; MODELS, ANIMAL; PLATINUM; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; RETINA; SCLERA; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL PROSTHESIS;

EID: 84871679455     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.12-9434     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. de Balthasar C, Patel S, Roy A, et al. Factors affecting perceptual thresholds in epiretinal prostheses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:2303-2314.
2. Wilke R, Gabel VP, Sachs H, et al. Spatial resolution and perception of patterns mediated by a subretinal 16-electrode array in patients blinded by hereditary retinal dystrophies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:5995-6003.
3. Zrenner E, Bartz-Schmidt KU, Benav H, et al. Subretinal electronic chips allow blind patients to read letters and combine them to words. Proc Biol Sci. 2011;278:1489-1497.
4. Klauke S, Goertz M, Rein S, et al. Stimulation with a wireless intraocular epiretinal implant elicits visual percepts in blind humans: results from stimulation tests during the epiret3 prospective clinical trial. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52: 449-455.
5. Fujikado T, Kamei M, Sakaguchi H, et al. Testing of semichronically implanted retinal prosthesis by suprachoroidaltransretinal stimulation in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:4726-4733.
6. Hornig R, Zehnder T, Velikay-Parel M, Laube T, Feucht M, Richard G. The IMI retinal implant system. In: Humayun MS, Weiland JD, Chader G, Greenbaum E, eds. Artificial Sight: Basic Research, Biomedical Engineering, and Clinical Advances. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2007:111-128.
7. 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.
8. Rizzo JF III, Wyatt J, Loewenstein J, Kelly S, Shire D. Methods and perceptual thresholds for short-term electrical stimulation of human retina with microelectrode arrays. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:5355-5361.
9. Keserü M, Feucht M, Bornfeld N, et al. Acute electrical stimulation of the human retina with an epiretinal electrode array. Acta Ophthalmol. 2012;90:e1-8. doi:10.1111/j. 1755-3768.2011.02288.x.
10. Rizzo JF III. Update on retinal prosthetic research: the Boston retinal implant project. J Neuroophthalmol. 2011;31:160-168.
11. Guenther T, Lovell NH, Suaning GJ. Bionic vision: system architectures-a review. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2012;9:33-48.
12. Weiland JD, Cho AK, Humayun MS. Retinal prostheses: current clinical results and future needs. Ophthalmology. 2011;118: 2227-2237.
13. Ong JM, Cruz LD. The bionic eye: a review. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2012;40:6-17.
14. Humayun MS, de Juan E Jr, Weiland JD, et al. Pattern electrical stimulation of the human retina. Vis Res. 1999;39:2569-2576.
15. Black RC, Clark GM, Patrick JF. Current distribution measurements within the human cochlea. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1981;28:721-725.
16. Shannon RV. Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. II. Channel interaction. Hear Res. 1983;12:1-16.
17. Townshend B, White RL. Reduction of electrical interaction in auditory prostheses. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1987;34:891-897.
18. Seligman PM, Shepherd RK. Cochlear implants. In: Horch KW, Dhillon GS, eds. Neuroprosthetics: Theory and Practice. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing; 2004:878-904.
19. Wilke RG, Moghadam GK, Lovell NH, Suaning GJ, Dokos S. Electric crosstalk impairs spatial resolution of multi-electrode arrays in retinal implants. J Neural Eng. 2011;8:046016.
20. Dommel NB, Wong YT, Lehmann T, Dodds CW, Lovell NH, Suaning GJ. A CMOS retinal neurostimulator capable of focussed, simultaneous stimulation. J Neural Eng. 2009;6: 035006.
21. Caspi A, Dorn JD, McClure KH, Humayun MS, Greenberg RJ, McMahon MJ. Feasibility study of a retinal prosthesis: spatial vision with a 16-electrode implant. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009; 127:398-401.
22. Horsager A, Greenberg RJ, Fine I. Spatiotemporal interactions in retinal prosthesis subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010; 51:1223-1233.
23. Brindley GS, Lewin WS. The sensations produced by electrical stimulation of the visual cortex. J Physiol. 1968;196:479-493.
24. Shivdasani MN, Luu CD, Cicione R, et al. Evaluation of stimulus parameters and electrode geometry for an effective suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. J Neural Eng. 2010;7:036008.
25. Villalobos J, Allen PJ, McCombe MF, et al. Development of a surgical approach for a wide-view suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis: evaluation of implantation trauma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2012;250:399-407.
26. John SE, Shivdasani MN, Leuenberger J, et al. An automated system for rapid evaluation of high-density electrode arrays in neural prostheses. J Neural Eng. 2011;8:036011.
27. Tusa RJ, Palmer LA, Rosenquist AC. The retinotopic organization of area 17 (striate cortex) in the cat. J Comp Neurol. 1978;177:213-235.
28. Heffer LF, Fallon JB. A novel stimulus artifact removal technique for high-rate electrical stimulation. J Neurosci Methods. 2008;170:277-284.
29. Wilson JR, Sherman SM. Receptive-field characteristics of neurons in cat striate cortex: changes with visual field eccentricity. J Neurophysiol. 1976;39:512-533.
30. Hubel DH, Wiesel TN. Receptive fields of single neurones in the cat's striate cortex. J Physiol. 1959;148:574-591.
31. Eckhorn R, Wilms M, Schanze T, et al. Visual resolution with retinal implants estimated from recordings in cat visual cortex. Vis Res. 2006;46:2675-2690.
32. Elfar SD, Cottaris NP, Iezzi R, Abrams GW. A cortical (V1) neurophysiological recording model for assessing the efficacy of retinal visual prostheses. J Neurosci Methods. 2009;180: 195-207.
33. Loizou PC. Mimicking the human ear. Signal Processing Magazine, IEEE. 1998;15:101-130.
34. Horsager A, Boynton GM, Greenberg RJ, Fine I. Temporal interactions during paired-electrode stimulation in two retinal prosthesis subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:549-557.
35. Martinez LM, Alonso JM. Construction of complex receptive fields in cat primary visual cortex. Neuron. 2001;32:515-525.
36. Hubel DH, Wiesel TN. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. J Physiol. 1962;160:106-154.
37. Leventhal AG, Schall JD. Structural basis of orientation sensitivity of cat retinal ganglion cells. J Comp Neurol. 1983; 220:465-475.
38. Levick WR, Thibos LN. Analysis of orientation bias in cat retina. J Physiol. 1982;329:243-261.