Cargando…

Oculomotor Responses to Dynamic Stimuli in a 44-Channel Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis

PURPOSE: To investigate oculomotor behavior in response to dynamic stimuli in retinal implant recipients. METHODS: Three suprachoroidal retinal implant recipients performed a four-alternative forced-choice motion discrimination task over six sessions longitudinally. Stimuli were a single white bar (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Titchener, Samuel A., Kvansakul, Jessica, Shivdasani, Mohit N., Fallon, James B., Nayagam, D. A. X., Epp, Stephanie B., Williams, Chris E., Barnes, Nick, Kentler, William G., Kolic, Maria, Baglin, Elizabeth K., Ayton, Lauren N., Abbott, Carla J., Luu, Chi D., Allen, Penelope J., Petoe, Matthew A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7757638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33384885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.9.13.31
_version_ 1783626775789568000
author Titchener, Samuel A.
Kvansakul, Jessica
Shivdasani, Mohit N.
Fallon, James B.
Nayagam, D. A. X.
Epp, Stephanie B.
Williams, Chris E.
Barnes, Nick
Kentler, William G.
Kolic, Maria
Baglin, Elizabeth K.
Ayton, Lauren N.
Abbott, Carla J.
Luu, Chi D.
Allen, Penelope J.
Petoe, Matthew A.
author_facet Titchener, Samuel A.
Kvansakul, Jessica
Shivdasani, Mohit N.
Fallon, James B.
Nayagam, D. A. X.
Epp, Stephanie B.
Williams, Chris E.
Barnes, Nick
Kentler, William G.
Kolic, Maria
Baglin, Elizabeth K.
Ayton, Lauren N.
Abbott, Carla J.
Luu, Chi D.
Allen, Penelope J.
Petoe, Matthew A.
author_sort Titchener, Samuel A.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To investigate oculomotor behavior in response to dynamic stimuli in retinal implant recipients. METHODS: Three suprachoroidal retinal implant recipients performed a four-alternative forced-choice motion discrimination task over six sessions longitudinally. Stimuli were a single white bar (“moving bar”) or a series of white bars (“moving grating”) sweeping left, right, up, or down across a 42″ monitor. Performance was compared with normal video processing and scrambled video processing (randomized image-to-electrode mapping to disrupt spatiotemporal structure). Eye and head movement was monitored throughout the task. RESULTS: Two subjects had diminished performance with scrambling, suggesting retinotopic discrimination was used in the normal condition and made smooth pursuit eye movements congruent to the moving bar stimulus direction. These two subjects also made stimulus-related eye movements resembling optokinetic reflex (OKR) for moving grating stimuli, but the movement was incongruent with stimulus direction. The third subject was less adept at the task, appeared primarily reliant on head position cues (head movements were congruent to stimulus direction), and did not exhibit retinotopic discrimination and associated eye movements. CONCLUSIONS: Our observation of smooth pursuit indicates residual functionality of cortical direction-selective circuits and implies a more naturalistic perception of motion than expected. A distorted OKR implies improper functionality of retinal direction-selective circuits, possibly due to retinal remodeling or the non-selective nature of the electrical stimulation. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: Retinal implant users can make naturalistic eye movements in response to moving stimuli, highlighting the potential for eye tracker feedback to improve perceptual localization and image stabilization in camera-based visual prostheses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7757638
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77576382020-12-30 Oculomotor Responses to Dynamic Stimuli in a 44-Channel Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis Titchener, Samuel A. Kvansakul, Jessica Shivdasani, Mohit N. Fallon, James B. Nayagam, D. A. X. Epp, Stephanie B. Williams, Chris E. Barnes, Nick Kentler, William G. Kolic, Maria Baglin, Elizabeth K. Ayton, Lauren N. Abbott, Carla J. Luu, Chi D. Allen, Penelope J. Petoe, Matthew A. Transl Vis Sci Technol Article PURPOSE: To investigate oculomotor behavior in response to dynamic stimuli in retinal implant recipients. METHODS: Three suprachoroidal retinal implant recipients performed a four-alternative forced-choice motion discrimination task over six sessions longitudinally. Stimuli were a single white bar (“moving bar”) or a series of white bars (“moving grating”) sweeping left, right, up, or down across a 42″ monitor. Performance was compared with normal video processing and scrambled video processing (randomized image-to-electrode mapping to disrupt spatiotemporal structure). Eye and head movement was monitored throughout the task. RESULTS: Two subjects had diminished performance with scrambling, suggesting retinotopic discrimination was used in the normal condition and made smooth pursuit eye movements congruent to the moving bar stimulus direction. These two subjects also made stimulus-related eye movements resembling optokinetic reflex (OKR) for moving grating stimuli, but the movement was incongruent with stimulus direction. The third subject was less adept at the task, appeared primarily reliant on head position cues (head movements were congruent to stimulus direction), and did not exhibit retinotopic discrimination and associated eye movements. CONCLUSIONS: Our observation of smooth pursuit indicates residual functionality of cortical direction-selective circuits and implies a more naturalistic perception of motion than expected. A distorted OKR implies improper functionality of retinal direction-selective circuits, possibly due to retinal remodeling or the non-selective nature of the electrical stimulation. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: Retinal implant users can make naturalistic eye movements in response to moving stimuli, highlighting the potential for eye tracker feedback to improve perceptual localization and image stabilization in camera-based visual prostheses. The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2020-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7757638/ /pubmed/33384885 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.9.13.31 Text en Copyright 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Article
Titchener, Samuel A.
Kvansakul, Jessica
Shivdasani, Mohit N.
Fallon, James B.
Nayagam, D. A. X.
Epp, Stephanie B.
Williams, Chris E.
Barnes, Nick
Kentler, William G.
Kolic, Maria
Baglin, Elizabeth K.
Ayton, Lauren N.
Abbott, Carla J.
Luu, Chi D.
Allen, Penelope J.
Petoe, Matthew A.
Oculomotor Responses to Dynamic Stimuli in a 44-Channel Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis
title Oculomotor Responses to Dynamic Stimuli in a 44-Channel Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis
title_full Oculomotor Responses to Dynamic Stimuli in a 44-Channel Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis
title_fullStr Oculomotor Responses to Dynamic Stimuli in a 44-Channel Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis
title_full_unstemmed Oculomotor Responses to Dynamic Stimuli in a 44-Channel Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis
title_short Oculomotor Responses to Dynamic Stimuli in a 44-Channel Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis
title_sort oculomotor responses to dynamic stimuli in a 44-channel suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7757638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33384885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.9.13.31
work_keys_str_mv AT titchenersamuela oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT kvansakuljessica oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT shivdasanimohitn oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT fallonjamesb oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT nayagamdax oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT eppstephanieb oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT williamschrise oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT barnesnick oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT kentlerwilliamg oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT kolicmaria oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT baglinelizabethk oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT aytonlaurenn oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT abbottcarlaj oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT luuchid oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT allenpenelopej oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis
AT petoematthewa oculomotorresponsestodynamicstimuliina44channelsuprachoroidalretinalprosthesis