Cargando…

Progressive Retinal Degeneration Increases Cortical Response Latency of Light Stimulation but Not of Electric Stimulation

PURPOSE: The brain is known to change functionally and structurally in response to blindness, but less is known about the effects of restoration of cortical input on brain function. Here, we present a preliminary study to observe alterations in visual and electrical evoked cortical potentials as a f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Koo, Beomseo, Weiland, James D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9034728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35446408
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.11.4.19
_version_ 1784693173284503552
author Koo, Beomseo
Weiland, James D.
author_facet Koo, Beomseo
Weiland, James D.
author_sort Koo, Beomseo
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The brain is known to change functionally and structurally in response to blindness, but less is known about the effects of restoration of cortical input on brain function. Here, we present a preliminary study to observe alterations in visual and electrical evoked cortical potentials as a function of age in a clinically relevant animal model of retinitis pigmentosa. METHODS: We recorded brain potentials elicited by light (visual evoked potentials [VEPs]) or corneal electrical stimulation (electrical evoked response [EER]) in retinal degenerate animal model LE-P23H-1. We used a linear mixed model to examine the effects of age on latency and amplitude of VEP and EER age groups P120, P180, and P360. RESULTS: VEP N1, P1, and N2 latency and amplitude were analyzed across animal age. For 1 Hz VEP, N1 latency increased significantly with animal age (slope = 0.053 ± 0.020 ms/day, P < 0.01). For 10 Hz VEP, N1, P1, and N2 latency increased significantly with animal age (slope = 0.104 ± 0.011, 0.135 ± 0.011, 0.087 ± 0.023 ms/day, and P < 0.001 for all VEP peaks). Conversely, EER latency did not change with age. Signal amplitude of VEP or EER did not change with age. CONCLUSIONS: Cortical potentials evoked by electrical stimulation of the retina do not diminish in spite of continued retinal degeneration in P23H rats. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that retinal bioelectronic treatments of retinitis pigmentosa will activate cortex consistently despite variations in outer retinal degeneration. Clinical studies of retinal stimulation should consider varying retinitis pigmentosa genotypes as part of the experimental design.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9034728
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90347282022-04-24 Progressive Retinal Degeneration Increases Cortical Response Latency of Light Stimulation but Not of Electric Stimulation Koo, Beomseo Weiland, James D. Transl Vis Sci Technol Article PURPOSE: The brain is known to change functionally and structurally in response to blindness, but less is known about the effects of restoration of cortical input on brain function. Here, we present a preliminary study to observe alterations in visual and electrical evoked cortical potentials as a function of age in a clinically relevant animal model of retinitis pigmentosa. METHODS: We recorded brain potentials elicited by light (visual evoked potentials [VEPs]) or corneal electrical stimulation (electrical evoked response [EER]) in retinal degenerate animal model LE-P23H-1. We used a linear mixed model to examine the effects of age on latency and amplitude of VEP and EER age groups P120, P180, and P360. RESULTS: VEP N1, P1, and N2 latency and amplitude were analyzed across animal age. For 1 Hz VEP, N1 latency increased significantly with animal age (slope = 0.053 ± 0.020 ms/day, P < 0.01). For 10 Hz VEP, N1, P1, and N2 latency increased significantly with animal age (slope = 0.104 ± 0.011, 0.135 ± 0.011, 0.087 ± 0.023 ms/day, and P < 0.001 for all VEP peaks). Conversely, EER latency did not change with age. Signal amplitude of VEP or EER did not change with age. CONCLUSIONS: Cortical potentials evoked by electrical stimulation of the retina do not diminish in spite of continued retinal degeneration in P23H rats. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that retinal bioelectronic treatments of retinitis pigmentosa will activate cortex consistently despite variations in outer retinal degeneration. Clinical studies of retinal stimulation should consider varying retinitis pigmentosa genotypes as part of the experimental design. The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology 2022-04-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9034728/ /pubmed/35446408 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.11.4.19 Text en Copyright 2022 The Authors https://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
Koo, Beomseo
Weiland, James D.
Progressive Retinal Degeneration Increases Cortical Response Latency of Light Stimulation but Not of Electric Stimulation
title Progressive Retinal Degeneration Increases Cortical Response Latency of Light Stimulation but Not of Electric Stimulation
title_full Progressive Retinal Degeneration Increases Cortical Response Latency of Light Stimulation but Not of Electric Stimulation
title_fullStr Progressive Retinal Degeneration Increases Cortical Response Latency of Light Stimulation but Not of Electric Stimulation
title_full_unstemmed Progressive Retinal Degeneration Increases Cortical Response Latency of Light Stimulation but Not of Electric Stimulation
title_short Progressive Retinal Degeneration Increases Cortical Response Latency of Light Stimulation but Not of Electric Stimulation
title_sort progressive retinal degeneration increases cortical response latency of light stimulation but not of electric stimulation
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9034728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35446408
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.11.4.19
work_keys_str_mv AT koobeomseo progressiveretinaldegenerationincreasescorticalresponselatencyoflightstimulationbutnotofelectricstimulation
AT weilandjamesd progressiveretinaldegenerationincreasescorticalresponselatencyoflightstimulationbutnotofelectricstimulation