Multi-electrode stimulation evokes consistent spatial patterns of phosphenes and improves phosphene mapping in blind subjects.

Cortex Electrical stimulation Mapping Phosphene Visual cortical prosthesis

Journal

Brain stimulation
ISSN: 1876-4754
Titre abrégé: Brain Stimul
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101465726

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Historique:
received: 17 01 2021
revised: 11 08 2021
accepted: 31 08 2021
pubmed: 6 9 2021
medline: 25 11 2021
entrez: 5 9 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Visual cortical prostheses (VCPs) have the potential to restore visual function to patients with acquired blindness. Successful implementation of VCPs requires the ability to reliably map the location of the phosphene produced by stimulation of each implanted electrode. To evaluate the efficacy of different approaches to phosphene mapping and propose simple improvements to mapping strategy. We stimulated electrodes implanted in the visual cortex of five blind and fifteen sighted patients. We tested two fixation strategies, unimanual fixation, where subjects placed a single index finger on a tactile fixation point and bimanual fixation, where subjects overlaid their right index finger over their left on the tactile point. In addition, we compared absolute mapping in which a single electrode was stimulated on each trial, and relative mapping with sequences containing stimulation of three to five phosphenes on each trial. Trial-to-trial variability present in relative mapping sequences was quantified. Phosphene mapping was less precise in blind subjects than in sighted subjects (2DRMS, 16 ± 2.9° vs. 1.9 ± 0.93°; t (18) = 18, p = <0.001). Within blind subjects, bimanual fixation resulted in more consistent phosphene localization than unimanual fixation (BS1: 4.0 ± 2.6° vs. 19 ± 4.7°, t (79) = 24, p < 0.001; BS2 4.1 ± 2.0° vs. 12 ± 2.7°, t (65) = 19, p < 0.001). Multi-point relative mapping had similar baseline precision to absolute mapping (BS1: 4.7 ± 2.6° vs. 3.9 ± 2.0°; BS2: 4.1 ± 2.0° vs. 3.2 ± 1.1°) but improved significantly when trial-to-trial translational variability was removed. Although multi-point mapping methods did reveal more of the functional organization expected in early visual cortex, subjects tended to artificially regularize the spacing between phosphenes. We attempt to address this issue by fitting a standard logarithmic map to relative multi-point sequences. Relative mapping methods, combined with bimanual fixation, resulted in the most precise estimates of phosphene organization. These techniques, combined with use of a standard logarithmic model of visual cortex, may provide a practical way to improve the implementation of a VCP.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Visual cortical prostheses (VCPs) have the potential to restore visual function to patients with acquired blindness. Successful implementation of VCPs requires the ability to reliably map the location of the phosphene produced by stimulation of each implanted electrode.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy of different approaches to phosphene mapping and propose simple improvements to mapping strategy.
METHODS
We stimulated electrodes implanted in the visual cortex of five blind and fifteen sighted patients. We tested two fixation strategies, unimanual fixation, where subjects placed a single index finger on a tactile fixation point and bimanual fixation, where subjects overlaid their right index finger over their left on the tactile point. In addition, we compared absolute mapping in which a single electrode was stimulated on each trial, and relative mapping with sequences containing stimulation of three to five phosphenes on each trial. Trial-to-trial variability present in relative mapping sequences was quantified.
RESULTS
Phosphene mapping was less precise in blind subjects than in sighted subjects (2DRMS, 16 ± 2.9° vs. 1.9 ± 0.93°; t (18) = 18, p = <0.001). Within blind subjects, bimanual fixation resulted in more consistent phosphene localization than unimanual fixation (BS1: 4.0 ± 2.6° vs. 19 ± 4.7°, t (79) = 24, p < 0.001; BS2 4.1 ± 2.0° vs. 12 ± 2.7°, t (65) = 19, p < 0.001). Multi-point relative mapping had similar baseline precision to absolute mapping (BS1: 4.7 ± 2.6° vs. 3.9 ± 2.0°; BS2: 4.1 ± 2.0° vs. 3.2 ± 1.1°) but improved significantly when trial-to-trial translational variability was removed. Although multi-point mapping methods did reveal more of the functional organization expected in early visual cortex, subjects tended to artificially regularize the spacing between phosphenes. We attempt to address this issue by fitting a standard logarithmic map to relative multi-point sequences.
CONCLUSIONS
Relative mapping methods, combined with bimanual fixation, resulted in the most precise estimates of phosphene organization. These techniques, combined with use of a standard logarithmic model of visual cortex, may provide a practical way to improve the implementation of a VCP.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34482000
pii: S1935-861X(21)00226-6
doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2021.08.024
pmc: PMC8488973
mid: NIHMS1739921
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1356-1372

Subventions

Organisme : NEI NIH HHS
ID : R01 EY023336
Pays : United States
Organisme : NINDS NIH HHS
ID : UH3 NS103442
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest We wish to draw the attention of the Editor to the following facts which may be considered as potential conflicts of interest and to significant financial contributions to this work. At the time of data collection, authors Michelle Armenta Salas, Uday Patel, Robert Greenburg, Jessy Dorn, and Nader Pouratian either worked for or consulted for Second Sight Medical Products, the clinical trial sponsor and manufacturer of the Orion Cortical Visual Prosthesis implanted in the blind subjects in this study.

Références

Brain Res. 2015 Jan 21;1595:51-73
pubmed: 25446438
Science. 2020 Dec 4;370(6521):1191-1196
pubmed: 33273097
Nature. 1976 Jan 15;259(5539):111-2
pubmed: 1246346
Neurol Int. 2018 Dec 19;10(4):7326
pubmed: 30687464
Am J Ophthalmol. 1979 Oct;88(4):727-35
pubmed: 507145
Arch Ophthalmol. 1991 Jun;109(6):816-24
pubmed: 2043069
PLoS Comput Biol. 2010 Jan 29;6(1):e1000651
pubmed: 20126528
Annu Rev Vis Sci. 2017 Sep 15;3:141-166
pubmed: 28753382
Cereb Cortex. 2019 Sep 13;29(10):4321-4333
pubmed: 30561529
Neuroimage. 1999 Feb;9(2):195-207
pubmed: 9931269
Science. 1974 Feb 1;183(4123):440-4
pubmed: 4808973
Brain. 2002 Mar;125(Pt 3):479-90
pubmed: 11872606
Neuroimage. 2009 Aug 1;47(1):98-106
pubmed: 19361567
J Neural Eng. 2005 Dec;2(4):R1-12
pubmed: 16317227
J Neurosurg. 2019 May 31;132(6):2000-2007
pubmed: 31151104
J Physiol. 1968 May;196(2):479-93
pubmed: 4871047
Cell. 2020 May 14;181(4):774-783.e5
pubmed: 32413298
Science. 1982 Nov 26;218(4575):902-4
pubmed: 7134981
Front Syst Neurosci. 2019 Feb 01;12:73
pubmed: 30774585
Exp Brain Res. 2003 Nov;153(2):266-74
pubmed: 12928763
Cereb Cortex. 1997 Mar;7(2):181-92
pubmed: 9087826
Cereb Cortex. 2015 Oct;25(10):3911-31
pubmed: 25452571
Br J Ophthalmol. 1918 Jul;2(7):353-84
pubmed: 18167806
Med Biol Eng Comput. 1990 May;28(3):257-9
pubmed: 2377008
Neuroimage. 1999 Feb;9(2):179-94
pubmed: 9931268
J Neural Eng. 2016 Apr;13(2):025003
pubmed: 26905379
Comput Biomed Res. 1996 Jun;29(3):162-73
pubmed: 8812068
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1986 Jul;27(7):1154-9
pubmed: 3487529
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Mar 19;93(6):2382-6
pubmed: 8637882
Adv Exp Med Biol. 2009;629:317-35
pubmed: 19227507
ASAIO J. 2000 Jan-Feb;46(1):3-9
pubmed: 10667705
Vision Res. 2011 Apr 13;51(7):718-37
pubmed: 20692278
Hum Neurobiol. 1982;1(4):281-3
pubmed: 7185798
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1980 Mar;19(3):328-31
pubmed: 6965668
Artif Organs. 2009 Dec;33(12):1109-16
pubmed: 19681837
Biometrics. 1978 Sep;34(3):399-410
pubmed: 719122
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2020 May;112:542-552
pubmed: 32092315
Curr Biol. 2012 Nov 6;22(21):2081-5
pubmed: 23041195
J Physiol. 1974 Dec;243(2):553-76
pubmed: 4449074
J Vis. 2003;3(10):586-98
pubmed: 14640882
J Neurosci. 2017 Jul 26;37(30):7188-7197
pubmed: 28652411
Neuron. 2016 Dec 21;92(6):1213-1219
pubmed: 27939584
PLoS Comput Biol. 2014 Mar 27;10(3):e1003538
pubmed: 24676149
Mil Med Res. 2019 Jun 5;6(1):19
pubmed: 31167653

Auteurs

Denise Oswalt (D)

Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: denise.oswalt@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.

William Bosking (W)

Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Ping Sun (P)

Department of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.

Sameer A Sheth (SA)

Department of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.

Soroush Niketeghad (S)

Department of Neurosurgery, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Michelle Armenta Salas (MA)

Department of Neurosurgery, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Uday Patel (U)

Second Sight Medical Products, Sylmar, CA, USA.

Robert Greenberg (R)

Second Sight Medical Products, Sylmar, CA, USA.

Jessy Dorn (J)

Second Sight Medical Products, Sylmar, CA, USA.

Nader Pouratian (N)

Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA.

Michael Beauchamp (M)

Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Daniel Yoshor (D)

Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH