ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Extraocular Electrical Stimulation Activates Retinal Ganglion Cells In Vivo.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Here, we directly demonstrate that extraocular electrical stimulation can reliably activate retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) in vivo and systematically identify optimal stimulation waveforms that maximize RGC activation at tolerable amplitudes. Approach: Using transpupillary two-photon calcium imaging in Thy1-GCaMP6f rats, we directly visualized RGC activation during extraocular electrical stimulation with single-cell resolution. We tested symmetric (SCB 1:1) and asymmetric (ACB 1:4) charge-balanced waveforms across frequencies ranging from 20 to 5,000 Hz and amplitudes from 1 to 300 μA, correlating cellular calcium responses with behavioral outcomes during awake stimulation. Main Results: ACB 1:4 stimulation at lower frequencies (20-50 Hz) robustly and reliably activates RGC somas in vivo, producing larger calcium responses at lower amplitudes than SCB 1:1. At comparable amplitudes, ACB stimulation generated 1.8-fold greater calcium responses. In contrast, SCB stimulation required higher amplitudes that exceeded animal tolerance before reliable RGC activation could be achieved. Significance: These findings provide direct evidence that extraocular electrodes can reliably activate RGCs in vivo. Notably, stimulation parameters previously associated with full-length optic nerve regeneration were found to be minimally effective at activating RGCs in vivo, suggesting increased gains could be had with newer approaches. The results further demonstrate that waveform asymmetry improves the efficiency of optic nerve stimulation by engaging RGC somas at lower, more tolerable, amplitudes. By combining two-photon imaging with behavioral tolerance testing, this work defines a practical therapeutic window for extraocular stimulation of the eye and establishes asymmetric charge-balanced waveforms as a more clinically translatable strategy for visual pathway neuromodulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.