Original articleVisual Performance Using a Retinal Prosthesis in Three Subjects With Retinitis Pigmentosa
Section snippets
Methods
This study protocol was granted an Investigational Device Exemption by the US Food and Drug Administration and was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Southern California. This research adhered to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki. The trial is registered at the National Institutes of Health (trial identifier NCT00279500).
Experiments Using Computer Input
Subjects scored better than chance in eight of nine computer-controlled experiments (see Figure 2). When asked to identify which of two electrodes had been presented (experiment 1), all of the subjects performed significantly better than chance (S1 = 72%, S2 = 100%, S3 = 67%; P < .01). This suggested that the percepts elicited by individual electrodes remain reasonably consistent over short periods. In experiment 2 (sequential activation of paired electrodes), all three subjects performed
Discussion
The safety and feasibility of microelectronic implants has been supported by several recent studies, and the relative merits of epiretinal and subretinal retinal implants vs other approaches such as optic nerve cuffs and cortical implants has been extensively discussed in the literature.5, 6 Recent clinical trials of retinal implants have included a passive subretinal device, an active subretinal device (Zrenner E, et al. IOVS 2006;47: ARVO E-Abstract 1538), and an active epiretinal device
References (21)
- et al.
Management of hereditary retinal degenerations: present status and future directions
Surv Ophthalmol
(1999) - et al.
Retinal prosthesis for the blind
Surv Ophthalmol
(2002) - et al.
Neural remodeling in retinal degeneration
Prog Retin Eye Res
(2003) - et al.
Pattern electrical stimulation of the human retina
Vision Res
(1999) - et al.
Visual perception in a blind subject with a chronic microelectronic retinal prosthesis
Vision Res
(2003) - et al.
Management of inherited outer retinal dystrophies: present and future
Br J Ophthalmol
(1999) - et al.
Prevalence of age-related macular degeneration in the United States
Arch Ophthalmol
(2004) - et al.
Retina and optic nerve disease
Artif Organs
(2003) Will retinal implants restore vision?
Science
(2002)- et al.
Morphometric analysis of macular photoreceptors and ganglion cells in retinas with retinitis pigmentosa
Arch Ophthalmol
(1992)
Cited by (205)
Multisensory perception in Argus II retinal prosthesis patients: Leveraging auditory-visual mappings to enhance prosthesis outcomes
2021, Vision ResearchCitation Excerpt :Argus II patients have been able to perform basic reach and grasp tasks, detect motion, distinguish common objects, and read letters and words (Castaldi et al., 2016; da Cruz et al., 2013; Dorn et al., 2013; Kotecha, Zhong, Stewart & Da Cruz, 2014; Luo et al., 2014). These initial tasks have shown both a large variability in patient functionality and slower task performance than predicted (Beyeler et al., 2019; Fornos, Sommerhalder et al., 2012; Luo et al., 2016; Yanai et al., 2007). Limitations in task performance in all of these emerging visual restoration therapies could be aided by the use of crossmodal interactions to enhance learning with multimodal training (Seitz et al., 2006), and to improve visual search via crossmodal cueing.
Bioengineering strategies for restoring vision
2023, Nature Biomedical EngineeringApplications of advanced technologies to retinal prosthesis
2023, Biomedical Engineering Principles Of The Bionic Man (Second Edition)Simulating the perceptual effects of electrode-retina distance in prosthetic vision
2022, Journal of Neural EngineeringAn in-silico analysis of electrically evoked responses of midget and parasol retinal ganglion cells in different retinal regions
2022, Journal of Neural EngineeringPowering Implantable and Ingestible Electronics
2021, Advanced Functional Materials
Supplemental Material available at AJO.com.