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

PURPOSE Since 2002, six blind patients have undergone implantation of an epiretinal 4 × 4 electrode array designed to directly stimulate the remaining cells of the retina after severe photoreceptor degeneration due to retinitis pigmentosa. This study was conducted to investigate how the brightness of percepts is affected by pulse timing across electrodes in two of these patients. METHODS Subjects compared the perceived brightness of a standard stimulus (synchronous pulse trains presented across pairs of electrodes) to the perceived brightness of a test stimulus (pulse trains across the electrode pair phase shifted by 0.075, 0.375, 1.8, or 9 ms). The current amplitude necessary for each phase-shifted test stimulus to match the brightness of the standard was determined. RESULTS Depending on the electrode pair, interactions between electrodes were either facilitatory (the perceived brightness produced by stimulating the pair of electrodes was greater than that produced by stimulating either electrode alone) or suppressive (the perceived brightness produced by stimulating the pair of electrodes was less than that produced by stimulating either electrode alone). The amount of interaction between electrodes decreased as a function of increased separation both in time (the phase-shift between pulse trains) and space (center-to-center distance between the electrode pair). CONCLUSIONS For visual prostheses to represent visual scenes that are changing in both space and time requires the development of spatiotemporal models describing the effects of stimulation across multiple electrodes. During multielectrode stimulation, interactions between electrodes have a significant influence on subjective brightness that includes both facilitatory and suppressive effects, and these interactions can be described with a simple computational model. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00279500.).

[1]  Herwig Baier,et al.  Remote Control of Neuronal Activity with a Light-Gated Glutamate Receptor , 2007, Neuron.

[2]  J. Weiland,et al.  Visual performance using a retinal prosthesis in three subjects with retinitis pigmentosa. , 2007, American journal of ophthalmology.

[3]  D T Lawson,et al.  Design and evaluation of a continuous interleaved sampling (CIS) processing strategy for multichannel cochlear implants. , 1993, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[4]  S. Kelly,et al.  Perceptual efficacy of electrical stimulation of human retina with a microelectrode array during short-term surgical trials. , 2003, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[5]  A. J. Roman,et al.  Human RPE65 gene therapy for Leber congenital amaurosis: persistence of early visual improvements and safety at 1 year. , 2009, Human gene therapy.

[6]  Nick Tyler,et al.  Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Leber's congenital amaurosis. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  P. Romano.  Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology. , 2000, Binocular vision & strabismus quarterly.

[8]  L. Kaufman,et al.  Handbook of perception and human performance , 1986 .

[9]  R. Masland,et al.  Restoration of visual function in retinal degeneration mice by ectopic expression of melanopsin , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  Thomas Euler,et al.  Functional Stability of Retinal Ganglion Cells after Degeneration-Induced Changes in Synaptic Input , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  S. Daiger,et al.  Perspective on genes and mutations causing retinitis pigmentosa. , 2007, Archives of ophthalmology.

[12]  C. Rashbass.  The visibility of transient changes of luminance , 1970, The Journal of physiology.

[13]  M. Mcmahon,et al.  Retinal prosthesis phosphene shape analysis , 2008, 2008 30th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[14]  Heidi S. Fisher,et al.  Adaptation from invisible flicker. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  Marco Pelizzone,et al.  Electrical field interactions in different cochlear implant systems. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  B. Jones,et al.  Retinal remodeling in inherited photoreceptor degenerations , 2003, Molecular Neurobiology.

[17]  S. S. Stevens.  On the psychophysical law. , 1957, Psychological review.

[18]  Philipos C. Loizou,et al.  Effects of electrode design and configuration on channel interactions , 2006, Hearing Research.

[19]  W. Hauswirth,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. , 2008, Human gene therapy.

[20]  S. Baccus.  Timing and computation in inner retinal circuitry. , 2007, Annual review of physiology.

[21]  Edwin M Stone,et al.  Human gene therapy for RPE65 isomerase deficiency activates the retinoid cycle of vision but with slow rod kinetics , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  B. Jones,et al.  Retinal remodelling , 2005, Clinical & experimental optometry.

[23]  Joseph F Rizzo,et al.  Responses of rabbit retinal ganglion cells to electrical stimulation with an epiretinal electrode , 2005, Journal of neural engineering.

[24]  G. Chader,et al.  Animal models in research on retinal degenerations: past progress and future hope , 2002, Vision Research.

[25]  Ione Fine,et al.  Brightness as a function of current amplitude in human retinal electrical stimulation , 2010 .

[26]  R. Klein,et al.  Causes and prevalence of visual impairment among adults in the United States. , 2004, Archives of ophthalmology.

[27]  E. Parelhoff,et al.  Retinal dystrophy and macular coloboma , 1988, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[28]  Norberto M Grzywacz,et al.  Stimulus-dependent correlated firing in directionally selective retinal ganglion cells , 2005, Visual Neuroscience.

[29]  Robert J Greenberg,et al.  Spatiotemporal interactions in retinal prosthesis subjects. , 2010, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[30]  F. Werblin,et al.  A method for generating precise temporal patterns of retinal spiking using prosthetic stimulation. , 2006, Journal of neurophysiology.

[31]  D. Baylor,et al.  Spectral sensitivity of human cone photoreceptors , 1987, Nature.

[32]  Felix Wichmann,et al.  The psychometric function: II. Bootstrap-based confidence intervals and sampling , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[33]  E. Berson,et al.  Prevalence of retinitis pigmentosa in Maine. , 1984, American journal of ophthalmology.

[34]  Dirk Trauner,et al.  Light-induced depolarization of neurons using a modified Shaker K(+) channel and a molecular photoswitch. , 2006, Journal of neurophysiology.

[35]  W M Jenkins,et al.  BIOPHYSICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN ELECTRICAL STIMULATION OF THE AUDITORY NERVOUS SYSTEM a , 1983, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[36]  J. Weiland,et al.  Perceptual thresholds and electrode impedance in three retinal prosthesis subjects , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[37]  E. Isacoff,et al.  Light-activated ion channels for remote control of neuronal firing , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[38]  Douglas S Kim,et al.  Light-activated channels targeted to ON bipolar cells restore visual function in retinal degeneration , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[39]  M.S. Humayun,et al.  Visual task performance in blind humans with retinal prosthetic implants , 2004, The 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[40]  Mark S Humayun,et al.  Predicting visual sensitivity in retinal prosthesis patients. , 2009, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[41]  J. Weiland,et al.  Pattern electrical stimulation of the human retina , 1999, Vision Research.

[42]  Alexander Sumaroka,et al.  Vision 1 year after gene therapy for Leber's congenital amaurosis. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[43]  E. Strettoi,et al.  Retinal Ganglion Cells Survive and Maintain Normal Dendritic Morphology in a Mouse Model of Inherited Photoreceptor Degeneration , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[44]  E. Bamberg,et al.  Channelrhodopsin-2, a directly light-gated cation-selective membrane channel , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[45]  Gislin Dagnelie,et al.  Visual perception in a blind subject with a chronic microelectronic retinal prosthesis , 2003, Vision Research.

[46]  Arup Roy,et al.  Factors affecting perceptual thresholds in epiretinal prostheses. , 2008, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[47]  A. Milam,et al.  Preservation of the inner retina in retinitis pigmentosa. A morphometric analysis. , 1997, Archives of ophthalmology.

[48]  S. Stasheff,et al.  Emergence of sustained spontaneous hyperactivity and temporary preservation of OFF responses in ganglion cells of the retinal degeneration (rd1) mouse. , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.

[49]  E. Chichilnisky,et al.  High-Resolution Electrical Stimulation of Primate Retina for Epiretinal Implant Design , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[50]  K. Deisseroth,et al.  Millisecond-timescale, genetically targeted optical control of neural activity , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[51]  James Weiland,et al.  Artificial vision: needs, functioning, and testing of a retinal electronic prosthesis. , 2009, Progress in brain research.

[52]  A. Dizhoor,et al.  Ectopic Expression of a Microbial-Type Rhodopsin Restores Visual Responses in Mice with Photoreceptor Degeneration , 2006, Neuron.

[53]  W. C. Hall,et al.  High-speed mapping of synaptic connectivity using photostimulation in Channelrhodopsin-2 transgenic mice , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[54]  A. Milam,et al.  Morphometric analysis of the extramacular retina from postmortem eyes with retinitis pigmentosa. , 1999, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[55]  M. Pelizzone,et al.  Channel interactions with high-rate biphasic electrical stimulation in cochlear implant subjects , 2003, Hearing Research.