June 2021
Volume 62, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2021
Retinal integration with a subretinal honeycomb-shaped prosthesis
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Mohajeet Balveer Bhuckory
    Ophthalmology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
    Hansen Experimental Physics Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
  • Zhijie Chen
    Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
    Hansen Experimental Physics Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
  • Bingyi Wang
    Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
  • Tiffany Wanshing Huang
    Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
  • Ludwig Galambos
    Hansen Experimental Physics Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
  • Andrew Shin
    Material Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
  • Theodore Kamins
    Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
  • Daniel V Palanker
    Ophthalmology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
    Hansen Experimental Physics Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Mohajeet Bhuckory, None; Zhijie Chen, None; Bingyi Wang, None; Tiffany Huang, None; Ludwig Galambos, None; Andrew Shin, None; Theodore Kamins, Pixium Vision SA (C); Daniel Palanker, Pixium Vision SA (C), Pixium Vision SA (P)
  • Footnotes
    Support  DoD (# W81XWH1910738), AFOSR (# FA9550-19-1-0402), NIH (R01-EY-027786, P30-EY-026877), IRRF (Rich Postdoctoral award)
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2021, Vol.62, 3213. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Mohajeet Balveer Bhuckory, Zhijie Chen, Bingyi Wang, Tiffany Wanshing Huang, Ludwig Galambos, Andrew Shin, Theodore Kamins, Daniel V Palanker; Retinal integration with a subretinal honeycomb-shaped prosthesis. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021;62(8):3213.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : In patients with geographic atrophy, subretinal photovoltaic implants with 100µm pixels provided prosthetic acuity of 1.1-1.3 pixels (20/460 – 20/560). Rats with implants of 75 and 55µm pixels also demonstrated grating acuity matching the pixel pitch. However, stimulation threshold increases for smaller pixels in the current design and exceeds the charge injection limit with pixels below 40µm. To decrease the stimulation threshold and decouple it from the pixel width, we added honeycomb-shaped vertical walls surrounding each pixel. This approach relies on migration of the retinal cells into the honeycomb wells. Here, we investigate the structural integration of the inner retinal cells with the wells and its effect on retinal stimulation.

Methods : To evaluate the effect of honeycombs on retinal stimulation, 25µm tall walls were polymerized on flat photovoltaic arrays with 40µm and 20µm pixels. Visually evoked potentials (VEP) were recorded weekly for 9 weeks after implantation of the arrays beneath the degenerate rat retina. Retinal anatomy was examined by confocal imaging of immunolabelled whole mounts.

Results : With both, flat and honeycomb implants, VEP amplitude decreased after the day of implantation and then gradually increased back to the original level during 6-9 weeks post-op. However, stimulation thresholds with honeycombs and flat implants of both pixel sizes remained the same: 0.057±0.029 mW/mm2. Majority of cells populating the wells were cone and rod bipolar cells, and much fewer horizontal cells. The macro- and micro-glial response to the honeycomb implants were comparable to that with flat implants and to the degenerate retina controls. The deep capillary plexus (DCP) and amacrine cells, as well as the inner plexiform layer remained entirely above the honeycomb walls.

Conclusions : Retinal migration into the honeycombs does not negatively affect its electrical excitability. Lack of cell death indicates that DCP above the wells provides oxygenation and nutrients to cells within the wells. Comparable glial response to flat implants suggests that migration and separation of the retinal cells by the walls does not cause additional stress. The 25µm deep wells accept majority of the INL, while leaving the tertiary neurons, such as amacrine and ganglion cells, outside. This is important for selective stimulation of the secondary neurons and preservation of the inner retinal signal processing in prosthetic vision.

This is a 2021 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×