OBJECTIVE: In clinical trials, retinitis pigmentosa patients implanted with a retinal prosthetic device show enhanced spatial vision, including the ability to read large text and navigate. New prosthetics aim to increase spatial resolution by decreasing pixel/electrode size and limiting current spread. To examine spatial resolution of a new prosthetic design, we characterized and compared two photovoltaic array (PVA) designs and their interaction with the retina after subretinal implantation in transgenic S334ter line 3 rats (Tg S334ter-3). APPROACH: PVAs were implanted subretinally at two stages of degeneration and assessed in vivo using extracellular recordings in the superior colliculus (SC). Several aspects of this interaction were evaluated by varying duration, irradiance and position of a near infrared laser focused on the PVA. These characteristics included: activation threshold, response linearity, SC signal topography and spatial localization. The major design difference between the two PVA designs is the inclusion of local current returns in the newer design. MAIN RESULTS: When tested in vivo, PVA-evoked response thresholds were independent of pixel/electrode size, but differ between the new and old PVA designs. Response thresholds were independent of implantation age and duration (⩽7.5 months). For both prosthesis designs, threshold intensities were within established safety limits. PVA-evoked responses require inner retina synaptic transmission and do not directly activate retinal ganglion cells. The new PVA design evokes local retinal activation, which is not found with the older PVA design that lacks local current returns. SIGNIFICANCE: Our study provides in vivo evidence that prosthetics make functional contacts with the inner nuclear layer at several stages of degeneration. The new PVA design enhances local activation within the retina and SC. Together these results predict that the new design can potentially harness the inherent processing within the retina and is likely to produce higher spatial resolution in patients.
OBJECTIVE: In clinical trials, retinitis pigmentosapatients implanted with a retinal prosthetic device show enhanced spatial vision, including the ability to read large text and navigate. New prosthetics aim to increase spatial resolution by decreasing pixel/electrode size and limiting current spread. To examine spatial resolution of a new prosthetic design, we characterized and compared two photovoltaic array (PVA) designs and their interaction with the retina after subretinal implantation in transgenic S334ter line 3rats (Tg S334ter-3). APPROACH: PVAs were implanted subretinally at two stages of degeneration and assessed in vivo using extracellular recordings in the superior colliculus (SC). Several aspects of this interaction were evaluated by varying duration, irradiance and position of a near infrared laser focused on the PVA. These characteristics included: activation threshold, response linearity, SC signal topography and spatial localization. The major design difference between the two PVA designs is the inclusion of local current returns in the newer design. MAIN RESULTS: When tested in vivo, PVA-evoked response thresholds were independent of pixel/electrode size, but differ between the new and old PVA designs. Response thresholds were independent of implantation age and duration (⩽7.5 months). For both prosthesis designs, threshold intensities were within established safety limits. PVA-evoked responses require inner retina synaptic transmission and do not directly activate retinal ganglion cells. The new PVA design evokes local retinal activation, which is not found with the older PVA design that lacks local current returns. SIGNIFICANCE: Our study provides in vivo evidence that prosthetics make functional contacts with the inner nuclear layer at several stages of degeneration. The new PVA design enhances local activation within the retina and SC. Together these results predict that the new design can potentially harness the inherent processing within the retina and is likely to produce higher spatial resolution in patients.
Authors: Jeng-Shyong Shyu; Mauricio Maia; James D Weiland; Thomas Ohearn; Shih-Jen Chen; Eyal Margalit; Satoshi Suzuki; Mark S Humayun Journal: IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: J D Loudin; D M Simanovskii; K Vijayraghavan; C K Sramek; A F Butterwick; P Huie; G Y McLean; D V Palanker Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2007-02-26 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Trevor J McGill; Glen T Prusky; Robert M Douglas; Douglas Yasumura; Michael T Matthes; Robert J Lowe; Jacque L Duncan; Haidong Yang; Kelly Ahern; Kate M Daniello; Byron Silver; Matthew M LaVail Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-09-14 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Machelle T Pardue; Michael J Phillips; Hang Yin; Brian D Sippy; Sarah Webb-Wood; Alan Y Chow; Sherry L Ball Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Eberhart Zrenner; Karl Ulrich Bartz-Schmidt; Heval Benav; Dorothea Besch; Anna Bruckmann; Veit-Peter Gabel; Florian Gekeler; Udo Greppmaier; Alex Harscher; Steffen Kibbel; Johannes Koch; Akos Kusnyerik; Tobias Peters; Katarina Stingl; Helmut Sachs; Alfred Stett; Peter Szurman; Barbara Wilhelm; Robert Wilke Journal: Proc Biol Sci Date: 2010-11-03 Impact factor: 5.349
Authors: Adewumi N Adekunle; Alice Adkins; Wei Wang; Henry J Kaplan; Juan Fernandez de Castro; Sang Joon Lee; Philip Huie; Daniel Palanker; Maureen McCall; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Matthew M LaVail; Shimpei Nishikawa; Roy H Steinberg; Muna I Naash; Jacque L Duncan; Nikolaus Trautmann; Michael T Matthes; Douglas Yasumura; Cathy Lau-Villacorta; Jeannie Chen; Ward M Peterson; Haidong Yang; John G Flannery Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2017-11-06 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: Andrew C Weitz; Devyani Nanduri; Matthew R Behrend; Alejandra Gonzalez-Calle; Robert J Greenberg; Mark S Humayun; Robert H Chow; James D Weiland Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Jacob G Light; James W Fransen; Adewumi N Adekunle; Alice Adkins; Gobinda Pangeni; James Loudin; Keith Mathieson; Daniel V Palanker; Maureen A McCall; Machelle T Pardue Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2014-09-16 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: Henri Lorach; Georges Goetz; Richard Smith; Xin Lei; Yossi Mandel; Theodore Kamins; Keith Mathieson; Philip Huie; James Harris; Alexander Sher; Daniel Palanker Journal: Nat Med Date: 2015-04-27 Impact factor: 53.440