Cortical responses elicited by photovoltaic subretinal prostheses exhibit similarities to visually evoked potentials

Nature Communications

Volumn 4, Issue , 2013, Pages

  Mandel, Yossi ^a   Goetz, Georges ^a,b   Lavinsky, Daniel ^a   Huie, Philip ^a   Mathieson, Keith ^c   Wang, Lele ^b   Kamins, Theodore ^b   Galambos, Ludwig ^b   Manivanh, Richard ^a   Harris, James ^b   Palanker, Daniel ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Stanford University   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DESIGN; DISEASE PREVALENCE; INFRARED RADIATION; PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSE; PIXEL; RODENT;

ACTION POTENTIAL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRODE; ELECTROSTIMULATION; EVOKED CORTICAL RESPONSE; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; INFRARED RADIATION; LIGHT; LIGHT IRRADIANCE; NONHUMAN; RAT; RETINAL IMPLANT; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; STIMULATION;

RATTUS;

EID: 84879614587     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms2980     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Friedman, D. S. et al. Prevalence of age-related macular degeneration in the United States. Arch. Ophthalmol. 122, 564-572 (2004). (Pubitemid 38456293)
2. Martin, D. F. et al. Ranibizumab and bevacizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. N. Engl. J. Med. 364, 1897-1908 (2011).
3. Martin, D. F. et al. Ranibizumab and Bevacizumab for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: two-year results. Ophthalmology 119, 1388-1398 (2012).
4. 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. 28, 14282-14292 (2008).
5. Kim, S. Y. et al. Morphometric analysis of the macula in eyes with disciform age-related macular degeneration. Retina 22, 471-477 (2002). (Pubitemid 35025524)
6. Stone, J. L. et al. Morphometric analysis of macular photoreceptors and ganglion cells in retinas with retinitis pigmentosa. Arch. Ophthalmol. 110, 1634-1639 (1992).
7. Humayun, M. S. et al. Interim results from the international trial of Second Sight's visual prosthesis. Ophthalmology 119, 779-788 (2012).
8. Zrenner, E. et al. Subretinal electronic chips allow blind patients to read letters and combine them to words. Proc. Biol. Sci. 278, 1489-1497 (2011).
9. Nanduri, D. et al. Frequency and amplitude modulation have different effects on the percepts elicited by retinal stimulation. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 53, 205-214 (2012).
10. Humayun, M. S. et al. Pattern electrical stimulation of the human retina. Vision Res. 39, 2569-2576 (1999). (Pubitemid 29197302)
11. Rizzo, 3rd J. F. et al. Perceptual efficacy of electrical stimulation of human retina with a microelectrode array during short-term surgical trials. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 44, 5362-5369 (2003).
12. Nanduri, D. et al. Frequency and amplitude modulation have different effects on the percepts elicited by retinal stimulation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 53, 205-214 (2012).
13. Freeman, D. K. et al. Selective activation of neuronal targets with sinusoidal electric stimulation. J. Neurophysiol. 104, 2778-2791 (2010).
14. Kakkar, V. Low power architecture for cochlear implant. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. 2, 51-58 (2010).
15. Wang, Z., Mai, S. & Zhang., C. in 4th IEEE Int. Symp. Electronic Design, Test Appl. 163-166. (Hong Kong, 2008).
16. Stingl, K. et al. Artificial vision with wirelessly powered subretinal electronic implant alpha-IMS. Proc. Biol. Sci. 280, 20130077 (2013).
17. Wilke, R. G. et al. Electric crosstalk impairs spatial resolution of multi-electrode arrays in retinal implants. J. Neural Eng. 8, 046016 (2011).
18. Wilke, R. 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. 52, 5995-6003 (2011).
19. Mathieson, K. et al. Photovoltaic retinal prosthesis with high pixel density. Nat. Photon. 6, 391-397 (2012).
20. Loudin, J. D. et al. Optoelectronic retinal prosthesis: system design and performance. J. Neural Eng. 4, S72-S84 (2007). (Pubitemid 46357450)
21. Loudin, J. D. et al. Photodiode circuits for retinal prostheses. Biomed. Circuits Syst. IEEE Trans. 5, 468-480 (2011).
22. Palanker, D. et al. Design of a high resolution optoelectronic retinal prosthesis. J. Neural Eng. 2, S105-S120 (2005). (Pubitemid 41238014)
23. Wang, L. et al. Photovoltaic retinal prosthesis: implant fabrication and performance. J. Neural Eng. 9, 046014 (2012).
24. Katz, M. L., Eldred, G. E. & Robison, Jr. W. G. Lipofuscin autofluorescence: evidence for vitamin A involvement in the retina. Mech. Ageing. Dev. 39, 81-90 (1987). (Pubitemid 17091162)
25. Lamb, T. D. & Pugh, Jr. E. N. Phototransduction, dark adaptation, and rhodopsin regeneration the proctor lecture. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 47, 5137-5152.
26. Jacobs, G. H., Fenwick, J. A. & Williams, G. A. Cone-based vision of rats for ultraviolet and visible lights. J. Exp. Biol. 204(Pt 14): 2439-2446 (2001). (Pubitemid 34869470)
27. Wells, E. F. et al. Critical flicker frequency responses in visual cortex. Exp. Brain Res. 139, 106-110 (2001). (Pubitemid 32646315)
28. Golan, L. et al. Design and characteristics of holographic neural photostimulation systems. J. Neural Eng. 6, 066004 (2009).
29. Jensen, R. J. & Rizzo, 3rd J. F. Thresholds for activation of rabbit retinal ganglion cells with a subretinal electrode. Exp. Eye Res. 83, 367-373 (2006). (Pubitemid 44183732)
30. Maunsell, J. H. et al. Visual response latencies of magnocellular and parvocellular LGN neurons in macaque monkeys. Vis. Neurosci. 16, 1-14 (1999). (Pubitemid 29150495)
31. Nadig, M. N. Development of a silicon retinal implant: cortical evoked potentials following focal stimulation of the rabbit retina with light and electricity. Clin. Neurophysiol. 110, 1545-1553 (1999).
32. Li, L. et al. Intraorbital optic nerve stimulation with penetrating electrodes: in vivo electrophysiology study in rabbits. Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 247, 349-361 (2009).
33. Jensen, R. J. & Rizzo, 3rd J. F. Responses of ganglion cells to repetitive electrical stimulation of the retina. J. Neural Eng. 4, S1-S6 (2007). (Pubitemid 46357442)
34. Cai, C. et al. Response variability to high rates of electric stimulation in retinal ganglion cells. J. Neurophysiol. 106, 153-162 (2011).
35. Tsai, D. et al. Direct activation and temporal response properties of rabbit retinal ganglion cells following subretinal stimulation. J. Neurophysiol. 102, 2982-2993 (2009).
36. Marc, R. E., Jones, B. W., Watt, C. B. & Strettoi, E. Neural remodeling in retinal degeneration. Prog. Retin. Eye Res. 22, 607-655 (2003). (Pubitemid 36936804)
37. Ahuja., A. K. et al. Factors affecting perceptual threshold in Argust II retinal prosthesis subjects. Trans. Vis. Sci. Technol. 2 (2013).
38. McGill, T. J. et al. Quantification of spatial vision in the Royal College of Surgeons rat. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 45, 932-936 (2004). (Pubitemid 38868394)
39. Butterwick, A. et al. Effect of shape and coating of a subretinal prosthesis on its integration with the retina. Exp. Eye Res. 88, 22-29 (2009).
40. You, Y. et al. Latency delay of visual evoked potential is a real measurement of demyelination in a rat model of optic neuritis. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 52, 6911-6918 (2011).
41. Berkowitz, B. A., Lukaszew, R. A., Mullins, C. M. & Penn, J. S. Impaired hyaloidal circulation function and uncoordinated ocular growth patterns in experimental retinopathy of prematurity. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 39, 391-396 (1998). (Pubitemid 28093878)