PURPOSE: The suprachoroidal location for a retinal prosthesis provides advantages over other locations in terms of a simplified surgical procedure and a potentially more stable electrode-neural interface. The aim of this study was to assess the factors affecting perceptual thresholds, and to optimize stimulus parameters to achieve the lowest thresholds in patients implanted with a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. METHODS: Three patients with profound vision loss from retinitis pigmentosa were implanted with a suprachoroidal array. Perceptual thresholds measured on individual electrodes were analyzed as a function of stimulus (return configuration, pulse polarity, pulse width, interphase gap, and rate), electrode (area and number of ganged electrodes), and clinical (retinal thickness and electrode-retina distance) parameters. RESULTS: A total of 92.8% of 904 measurements made up to 680 days post implantation yielded thresholds (range, 44-436 nanocoulombs [nC]) below the safe charge limit. Thresholds were found to vary between individuals and to depend significantly on electrode-retina distance, negligibly on retinal thickness, and not on electrode area or the number of ganged electrodes. Lowest thresholds were achieved when using a monopolar return, anodic-first polarity, short pulse widths (100 μs) combined with long interphase gaps (500 μs), and high stimulation rates (≥400 pulses per second [pps]). CONCLUSIONS: With suprachoroidal stimulation, anodic-first pulses with a monopolar return are most efficacious. To enable high rates, an appropriate combination of pulse width and interphase gap must be chosen to ensure low thresholds and electrode voltages. Electrode-retina distance needs to be monitored carefully owing to its influence on thresholds. These results inform implantable stimulator specifications for a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01603576.). Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
PURPOSE: The suprachoroidal location for a retinal prosthesis provides advantages over other locations in terms of a simplified surgical procedure and a potentially more stable electrode-neural interface. The aim of this study was to assess the factors affecting perceptual thresholds, and to optimize stimulus parameters to achieve the lowest thresholds in patients implanted with a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. METHODS: Three patients with profound vision loss from retinitis pigmentosa were implanted with a suprachoroidal array. Perceptual thresholds measured on individual electrodes were analyzed as a function of stimulus (return configuration, pulse polarity, pulse width, interphase gap, and rate), electrode (area and number of ganged electrodes), and clinical (retinal thickness and electrode-retina distance) parameters. RESULTS: A total of 92.8% of 904 measurements made up to 680 days post implantation yielded thresholds (range, 44-436 nanocoulombs [nC]) below the safe charge limit. Thresholds were found to vary between individuals and to depend significantly on electrode-retina distance, negligibly on retinal thickness, and not on electrode area or the number of ganged electrodes. Lowest thresholds were achieved when using a monopolar return, anodic-first polarity, short pulse widths (100 μs) combined with long interphase gaps (500 μs), and high stimulation rates (≥400 pulses per second [pps]). CONCLUSIONS: With suprachoroidal stimulation, anodic-first pulses with a monopolar return are most efficacious. To enable high rates, an appropriate combination of pulse width and interphase gap must be chosen to ensure low thresholds and electrode voltages. Electrode-retina distance needs to be monitored carefully owing to its influence on thresholds. These results inform implantable stimulator specifications for a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01603576.). Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
Authors: Kyle D Slater; Nicholas C Sinclair; Timothy S Nelson; Peter J Blamey; Hugh J McDermott Journal: IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med Date: 2015-07-13 Impact factor: 3.316
Authors: Lauren N Ayton; Joseph F Rizzo; Ian L Bailey; August Colenbrander; Gislin Dagnelie; Duane R Geruschat; Philip C Hessburg; Chris D McCarthy; Matthew A Petoe; Gary S Rubin; Philip R Troyk Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2020-07-16 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Lauren N Ayton; Nick Barnes; Gislin Dagnelie; Takashi Fujikado; Georges Goetz; Ralf Hornig; Bryan W Jones; Mahiul M K Muqit; Daniel L Rathbun; Katarina Stingl; James D Weiland; Matthew A Petoe Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2019-12-10 Impact factor: 3.708