Harue Matsumoto
Harue Matsumoto has a total of 11 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Atsushi Mizota
Department of Ophthalmology, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo 173-8605, Japan
3 shared publications - Celso Soiti Matsumoto
Department of Ophthalmology, Teikyo University School of Medicine, University Hospital Itabashi, Tokyo, Japan
3 shared publications - Kei Shinoda
Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Saitama Medical University, Saitama, Japan
3 shared publications - Takeshi Iwata
Division of Molecular and Cellular Biology, National Institute of Sensory Organs, National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan
2 shared publications - Eiichiro Nagasaka
Engineering Department, Mayo Corporation, Aichi, Japan
1 shared publication Haruka Minoda
Department of Ophthalmology, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 31 July 2014
- Published by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) in Journal of Vision
- Vol. 14 (9) , 2
What monitor can replace the cathode-ray tube for visual stimulation to elicit multifocal electroretinograms?
To compare a conventional cathode-ray tube (CRT) screen to organic light-emitting diode (OLED) and liquid crystal display (LCD) screens as visual stimulators to elicit multifocal electroretinograms (mfERGs), mfERGs were recorded from seven eyes of seven healthy volunteers (21 ± 2 years). The mfERGs elicited by a conventional CRT screen (S710, Compaq Computer Co.) were compared to those elicited by a studio-grade master OLED monitor (PVM-1741, Sony, Japan) and a conventional LCD (S1721, Flexscan, Eizo Nanao Corp., Japan). The luminance changes of each monitor were measured with a photodiode. CRT, OLED, and LCD screens with a frame frequency of 60 Hz were studied. A hexagonal stimulus array with 61 stimulus elements was created on each monitor. The serial white stimuli of the OLED screen at 60 Hz did not fuse, and that of the LCD screens fused. The amplitudes of P1 and P2 of the first-order kernels of the mfERGs were not significantly different from those elicited by the CRT and OLED screens, and the P1 amplitude of the first-order kernel elicited by the LCD stimuli was significantly smaller than that elicited by the CRT in all the groups of the averaged hexagonal elements. The implicit times were approximately 10 ms longer in almost all components elicited by the LCD screen compared to those elicited by the CRT screen. The mfERGs elicited by monitors other than the CRT should be carefully interpreted, especially those elicited by LCD screens. The OLED had good performance, and we conclude that it can replace the CRT as a stimulator for mfERGs; however, a collection of normative data is recommended.
- 31 July 2014
- Published by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) in Journal of Vision
- Vol. 14 (9) , 2
Open AccessWhat monitor can replace the cathode-ray tube for visual stimulation to elicit multifocal electroretinograms?
To compare a conventional cathode-ray tube (CRT) screen to organic light-emitting diode (OLED) and liquid crystal display (LCD) screens as visual stimulators to elicit multifocal electroretinograms (mfERGs), mfERGs were recorded from seven eyes of seven healthy volunteers (21 ± 2 years). The mfERGs elicited by a conventional CRT screen (S710, Compaq Computer Co.) were compared to those elicited by a studio-grade master OLED monitor (PVM-1741, Sony, Japan) and a conventional LCD (S1721, Flexscan, Eizo Nanao Corp., Japan). The luminance changes of each monitor were measured with a photodiode. CRT, OLED, and LCD screens with a frame frequency of 60 Hz were studied. A hexagonal stimulus array with 61 stimulus elements was created on each monitor. The serial white stimuli of the OLED screen at 60 Hz did not fuse, and that of the LCD screens fused. The amplitudes of P1 and P2 of the first-order kernels of the mfERGs were not significantly different from those elicited by the CRT and OLED screens, and the P1 amplitude of the first-order kernel elicited by the LCD stimuli was significantly smaller than that elicited by the CRT in all the groups of the averaged hexagonal elements. The implicit times were approximately 10 ms longer in almost all components elicited by the LCD screen compared to those elicited by the CRT screen. The mfERGs elicited by monitors other than the CRT should be carefully interpreted, especially those elicited by LCD screens. The OLED had good performance, and we conclude that it can replace the CRT as a stimulator for mfERGs; however, a collection of normative data is recommended.
- Open Access
- 1 January 2014
- Published by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) in Journal of Vision
- Vol. 14 (11) , 4
Binocular interaction of visually evoked cortical potentials elicited by dichoptic binocular stimulation
To analyze the interaction of cortical potentials elicited by dichoptic stimulation of the dominant and fellow eyes at different frequencies, a pair of programmed power supply units were used to drive a light emitting diode (LED) mounted in the right and left eyes of light-proof goggles to elicit the visually evoked cortical responses (VECPs). The right eye was stimulated at 11.5 Hz and the left eye at 11.0 Hz. Then the stimulation was repeated with the frequency of stimulation switched to the other eyes. The stimulus duration was 5 ms. The sampling rate was 1.0 Hz, and the duration of collection was 200 ms. The VECP of each eye was extracted separately. Individual VECPs could be recorded separately after simultaneous dichoptic stimulation of each eye. The amplitudes of the VECPs were not significantly different after stimulating the dominant eye and the fellow eye separately. The implicit times of negative peak (N-2) and the second positive peak (P-2) were shorter after stimulation of the dominant eye than after stimulation of the fellow eye, but the difference was not significant. However, the implicit time of N-2 elicited by stimulating the dominant eye was significantly shorter when the stimulation rate was 11.5 Hz. The VECPs elicited by stimulating the two eyes can be recorded separately by simultaneous dichoptic stimulation. Dichoptic simultaneous stimulation required a shorter time and may be a more sensitive method of analyzing binocular interactions compared to the classic VECPs using monocular stimulation.
- 1 January 2014
- Published by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) in Journal of Vision
- Vol. 14 (11) , 4
Open AccessBinocular interaction of visually evoked cortical potentials elicited by dichoptic binocular stimulation
To analyze the interaction of cortical potentials elicited by dichoptic stimulation of the dominant and fellow eyes at different frequencies, a pair of programmed power supply units were used to drive a light emitting diode (LED) mounted in the right and left eyes of light-proof goggles to elicit the visually evoked cortical responses (VECPs). The right eye was stimulated at 11.5 Hz and the left eye at 11.0 Hz. Then the stimulation was repeated with the frequency of stimulation switched to the other eyes. The stimulus duration was 5 ms. The sampling rate was 1.0 Hz, and the duration of collection was 200 ms. The VECP of each eye was extracted separately. Individual VECPs could be recorded separately after simultaneous dichoptic stimulation of each eye. The amplitudes of the VECPs were not significantly different after stimulating the dominant eye and the fellow eye separately. The implicit times of negative peak (N-2) and the second positive peak (P-2) were shorter after stimulation of the dominant eye than after stimulation of the fellow eye, but the difference was not significant. However, the implicit time of N-2 elicited by stimulating the dominant eye was significantly shorter when the stimulation rate was 11.5 Hz. The VECPs elicited by stimulating the two eyes can be recorded separately by simultaneous dichoptic stimulation. Dichoptic simultaneous stimulation required a shorter time and may be a more sensitive method of analyzing binocular interactions compared to the classic VECPs using monocular stimulation.
- Open Access
- 1 March 2012
- Published by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) in Journal of Vision
- Vol. 12 (3) , 6
Stiles-Crawford effect in focal macular ERGs from macaque monkey
Background: To determine whether the focal macular electroretinograms (FMERGs) are affected by the angle of incidence of the stimulating light on the retina, i.e., the Stiles–Crawford effect (SCE). Methods: FMERGs were elicited by focal stimulation of the macula in three light-adapted macaque monkeys. The incidence of the light on the retina was varied from 0 to ±11.7°. The effects of the incidence and wavelengths of the stimulus on the SCE were determined. Results: The amplitudes of the FMERG components were largest when the stimulus beam entered the eye on the visual axis and passed through the center of the pupil. The amplitudes gradually decreased as the stimulus beam passed through the pupil more eccentrically and fell on the retina more obliquely. All components of the FMERGs were decreased with the decrease least for the amplitude of the d-wave. Conclusions: The decrease in the amplitudes of the FMERGs as the angle of incidence of the stimulus beam on the retina increases demonstrates that the SCE can be detected in adult macaque monkeys. This objective method of assessing the SCE suggests that this technique can be used to assess the alignment of cones in humans with different types of macular diseases.
- 1 March 2012
- Published by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) in Journal of Vision
- Vol. 12 (3) , 6
Open AccessStiles-Crawford effect in focal macular ERGs from macaque monkey
Background: To determine whether the focal macular electroretinograms (FMERGs) are affected by the angle of incidence of the stimulating light on the retina, i.e., the Stiles–Crawford effect (SCE). Methods: FMERGs were elicited by focal stimulation of the macula in three light-adapted macaque monkeys. The incidence of the light on the retina was varied from 0 to ±11.7°. The effects of the incidence and wavelengths of the stimulus on the SCE were determined. Results: The amplitudes of the FMERG components were largest when the stimulus beam entered the eye on the visual axis and passed through the center of the pupil. The amplitudes gradually decreased as the stimulus beam passed through the pupil more eccentrically and fell on the retina more obliquely. All components of the FMERGs were decreased with the decrease least for the amplitude of the d-wave. Conclusions: The decrease in the amplitudes of the FMERGs as the angle of incidence of the stimulus beam on the retina increases demonstrates that the SCE can be detected in adult macaque monkeys. This objective method of assessing the SCE suggests that this technique can be used to assess the alignment of cones in humans with different types of macular diseases.