Case and control participants showed robust ipRGC-mediated components in their pupil responses to blue light. The results did not support the hypothesis that ipRGCs are "hypersensitive" to light in TBI participants with photophobia. However, greater pupil response variability in the case subjects suggests that ipRGC function may be more heterogeneous in this group.

No abstract

This study tested whether repeated traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) alter the objective structure or the objective function of retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) in human subjects recruited from an optometry clinic. Case subjects (n = 25) with a history of repeated TBIs (4.12 ± 2.76 TBIs over 0–41 years) and healthy pair-matched control subjects (n = 30) were prospectively recruited. Retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness was quantified with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography, and scanning laser polarimetry measured RNFL phase retardation. Measurements of the photopic negative response were made using full-field flash electroretinography. There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.42) in global RNFL thickness between the case cohort (96.6 ± 9.4 microns) and the control cohort (94.9 ± 7.0 microns). There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.80) in global RNFL phase retardation between the case cohort (57.9 ± 5.7 nm) and the control cohort (58.2 ± 4.6 nm). There were no statistically significant differences in the peak time (p = 0.95) of the PhNR or in the amplitude (p = 0.11) of the PhNR between the case cohort (69.9 ± 6.9 ms and 24.1 ± 5.1 μV, respectively) and the control cohort (70.1 ± 8.9 ms and 27.8 ± 9.1 μV, respectively). However, PhNR amplitude was more variable (p < 0.025) in the control cohort than in the case cohort. Within the case cohort, there was a strong positive (r = 0.53), but not statistically significant (p = 0.02), association between time since last TBI and PhNR amplitude. There was also a modest positive (r = 0.45), but not statistically significant (p = 0.04), association between time since first TBI and PhNR amplitude. Our results suggest that there were no statistically significant differences in the objective structure or in the objective function of RGCs between the case cohort and the control cohort. Future large, longitudinal studies will be necessary to confirm our negative results and to more fully investigate the potential interaction between PhNR amplitude and time since first or last TBI.

Background: Photophobia is a common sequela of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Diagnostic tools for this debilitating condition are lacking. This investigation sought to determine whether masked observers can distinguish subjects with TBI-associated photophobia from matched controls based on video recordings of their ocular responses to light stimulation. Methods: Cohorts of students (n = 20), photophobic TBI subjects (n = 28) and their matched control subjects (n = 12) were recruited. A custom pupillometer delivered bright (10 13 -10 14 photons/s/cm 2 ), flashing (0.10 Hz) red (625 nm) and blue (470 nm) light stimuli to subjects, and consensual pupil light responses were recorded. Using a five-point scale, masked observers later graded light aversion behaviour in the pupil video recordings obtained from the student cohort based on observed blinking, tearing and squinting. A grading scale was developed and used by masked observers to grade light aversion behaviour in videos obtained from subjects with post-TBI photophobia and the matched controls. These subjects also scored their perceived discomfort during each light pulse using a five-point scale.Results: The subjects in the TBI cohort scored both the blue and red flashing stimuli as evoking more discomfort, relative to control subjects, consistent with their reported photophobia. There was strong agreement among the masked observers for their grades of light aversion behaviour in the videos of ocular light stimulation (interclass correlation co-efficient = 0.78; 29 per cent perfect concordance). However, the median grades for the videos obtained from the TBI subject cohort were not significantly different from those for the control group. Conclusions: Clinicians cannot diagnose TBI-related photophobia based solely on video recordings of ocular responses to light. The need remains for an objective test to diagnose and manage this prevalent post-TBI symptom.

This study quantified and compared phase retardation distribution in the central macula with the thickness of the Henle fiber layer (HFL). A scanning laser polarimeter (SLP) was used to acquire 20° × 40° macular-centered images, either with fixed corneal compensation or with variable corneal compensation, in two cohorts of clinically normal subjects (N = 36). Phase retardation maps from SLP imaging were used to generate a macular cross pattern (fixed compensation) or an annulus pattern (variable compensation) centered on the macula. Intensity profiles in the phase retardation maps were produced using annular regions of interest at eccentricities from 0.25° to 3°. Pixel intensity was averaged at each eccentricity, acting as a surrogate for macular phase retardation. Directional OCT images were acquired in the horizontal and vertical meridians in all subjects, allowing visualization of the HFL thickness. HFL thickness was manually segmented in each meridian and averaged. In both cohorts, phase retardation and HFL thickness were highly correlated in the central 3° assessed, providing further evidence that the source of the phase retardation signal in the central macula is dominated by the HFL and that the center of the macula on cross sectional imaging corresponds closely with the center of the macular cross on SLP imaging.