2017
DOI: 10.1111/aos.13581
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Randomized controlled trial of electro‐stimulation therapies to modulate retinal blood flow and visual function in retinitis pigmentosa

Abstract: Increased blood flow following electro-stimulation therapies is an objective, physiological change that occurred in addition to visual function improvements in some RP patients.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
44
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
1
44
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The present findings offer the foundation for clinical observations that ES treatment may have the potential to improve sight in patients with photoreceptor degeneration. 6,12,35 Our data agree with earlier findings that ES enhanced ERG b-wave and ONL thickness or photoreceptor survival. 7,36 Moreover, our results suggest that ES drove molecular changes in MCs toward a progenitor-like status.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The present findings offer the foundation for clinical observations that ES treatment may have the potential to improve sight in patients with photoreceptor degeneration. 6,12,35 Our data agree with earlier findings that ES enhanced ERG b-wave and ONL thickness or photoreceptor survival. 7,36 Moreover, our results suggest that ES drove molecular changes in MCs toward a progenitor-like status.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…7,8 The protective effects of minimal or noninvasive ES have since been reported in patients with AMD, RP, and retinal artery occlusion. 6,[9][10][11][12][13]14 Importantly, no significant safety-related adverse effects were observed in any of these studies; however, due to the lack of standardization of ES parameters in clinical trials and animal studies, the effects of ES have often been inconsistent or even controversial. 15 To date, it is not yet known why or how ES improves vision.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This alternating microcurrent stimulation is suggested to act via several mechanisms: neurotrophic, anti-apoptotic, anti-glutammatic, and anti-inflammatory (Sehic et al, 2016). For this reason, tcES is used to treat nonarteritic ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION) (Fujikado et al, 2006), retinal artery occlusion (RAO) (Inomata et al, 2007;Oono et al, 2011;Naycheva et al, 2013), traumatic optic neuropathy (TON) (Fujikado et al, 2006), retinitis pigmentosa (Schatz et al, 2011(Schatz et al, , 2017Robles-Camarillo et al, 2013;Bittner et al, 2018aBittner et al, , 2018b, and macular dystrophy (Ozeki et al, 2013). We examined 11 papers on tcES.…”
Section: Study Identification and Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sham controls are documented to be widely used in basic and clinical research ( Naycheva et al, 2013 ; Bola et al, 2014 ; Zheng et al, 2017 ). Moreover, a good number of studies in retinal electrical stimulation genre including preclinical studies on rodents and clinical studies have also employed the use of sham controls ( Henrich-Noack et al, 2013 ; Sehic et al, 2016 ; Bittner et al, 2017 ; Schatz et al, 2017 ). Furthermore, we have used only rd10 mice as opposed to the wild type C57BL/6 mice because we wanted to ensure uniformity in the mice genotype for comparison of our ECoG results and to avoid unexpected ECoG results with wild type mice which for instance could possibly arise from genotype, or asymptomatic eye damage during animal housing or from other circumstances which could go unnoticed thus leading to false negative ECoG results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%