3Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigación Sanitaria (IRYCIS), Hospital Ramón y Cajal, 28034, Madrid, Spain2Department of Systems Biology, Laboratory of Visual Neurophysiology, University of Alcalá, Alcalá de Henares, 28871, Madrid, Spain1Eye Institute of Shandong First Medical University, Eye Hospital of Shandong First Medical University (Shandong Eye Hospital), State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base, Shandong Key Laboratory of Eye Diseases, School of Ophthalmology, Shandong First Medical University, Jinan 250021, China4These authors contributed equally.
刊名
Experimental Eye Research
年份
2025
卷号
Vol.255
页码
110381
ISSN
0014-4835
摘要
Purpose The signaling of flash visual evoked potential derives from the retina, but how retinal activity influences fVEP remains unclear. This work aimed to decipher the specific retinal kinetic contributions to fVEP response. Methods Monocular and simultaneous recordings of flash VEP and electroretinogram were performed. Healthy and adult mice C57BL/6J were used. The right eye was injected intravitreally with 1 μL of PBS containing 25 mM APB, 10 mM Bicuculline, 30 mM DNQX, 100 mM Glutamate, 10...更多
Purpose The signaling of flash visual evoked potential derives from the retina, but how retinal activity influences fVEP remains unclear. This work aimed to decipher the specific retinal kinetic contributions to fVEP response. Methods Monocular and simultaneous recordings of flash VEP and electroretinogram were performed. Healthy and adult mice C57BL/6J were used. The right eye was injected intravitreally with 1 μL of PBS containing 25 mM APB, 10 mM Bicuculline, 30 mM DNQX, 100 mM Glutamate, 100 mM GABA, 5 mM TPMPA, or 25 mM HEPES. The left eye was injected with 1 μL of PBS and then wore an opaque patch. The amplitude and latency of fVEP were analyzed in detail. Results In the control group, at light intensity ≤0.1 cd·s/m, four robust components of the fVEP recordings, N1, P1, N2, and P2, were identified in dark adaptation conditions. After administration reagents, N1 and P1 components were abolished by APB, Bicuculline, DNQX or TPMPA, but were preserved by GABA/Glutamate or HEPES. Notably, N2 and P2 components were always kept. The latency and amplitude of fVEP were shown to be stimulus-dependent. Nevertheless, the amplitude showed greater inter-individual variability than latency. Conclusion N1 and P1 components are strongly related to rod photoreceptor activity and/or the level of horizontal cell excitation. Latency, rather than fVEP amplitude, could be a good biomarker for clinical and diagnostic purposes, particularly the P2 latency in the rod-driven scotopic response.收起
