June 2021
Volume 62, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2021
A 44 Channel suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis : two year safety and stability results
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Penelope J Allen
    Centre for Eye Research Australia Ltd, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Surgery ( Ophthalmology), The University of Melbourne Faculty of Medicine Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • David A X Nayagam
    Bionics Institute, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Stephanie Epp
    Bionics Institute, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Chi D Luu
    Centre for Eye Research Australia Ltd, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Surgery ( Ophthalmology), The University of Melbourne Faculty of Medicine Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Nick Barnes
    Research School of Electrical, Energy and Materials Engineering, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
  • Maria Kolic
    Centre for Eye Research Australia Ltd, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Elizabeth K Baglin
    Centre for Eye Research Australia Ltd, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Carla J Abbott
    Centre for Eye Research Australia Ltd, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Surgery ( Ophthalmology), The University of Melbourne Faculty of Medicine Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Robert Briggs
    Surgery ( Otolaryngology), The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Jonathan Yeoh
    Centre for Eye Research Australia Ltd, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • William G Kentler
    School of Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Jessica Kvansakul
    Bionics Institute, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Samuel A Titchener
    Bionics Institute, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Matthew A Petoe
    Bionics Institute, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Christopher E Williams
    Bionics Institute, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Penelope Allen, Bionic Vision Technology (F), CERA (P); David Nayagam, Bionics Institute (P), Bionic Vision Technology (F); Stephanie Epp, Bionic Vision Technology (F); Chi Luu, Bionic Vision Technology (F); Nick Barnes, ANU (P), Bionic Vision Technology (F); Maria Kolic, Bionic Vision Technology (F); Elizabeth Baglin, Bionic Vision Technology (F); Carla Abbott, Bionic Vision Technology (F); Robert Briggs, Bionic Vision Technology (F); Jonathan Yeoh, Bionic Vision Technology (F); William Kentler, Bionic Vision Technology (F); Jessica Kvansakul, Bionic Vision Technology (F); Samuel Titchener, Bionic Vision Technology (F); Matthew Petoe, Bionics Institute (P), Bionic Vision Technology (F); Christopher Williams, Bionics Institute (P), Bionic Vision Technology (F)
  • Footnotes
    Support  NHMRC grant 1082358
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2021, Vol.62, 3164. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Penelope J Allen, David A X Nayagam, Stephanie Epp, Chi D Luu, Nick Barnes, Maria Kolic, Elizabeth K Baglin, Carla J Abbott, Robert Briggs, Jonathan Yeoh, William G Kentler, Jessica Kvansakul, Samuel A Titchener, Matthew A Petoe, Christopher E Williams; A 44 Channel suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis : two year safety and stability results. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021;62(8):3164.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : The success of our prototype clinical trial (NCT01603576) of a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis led us to develop a 44 channel fully implantable device with a transcutaneous receiver stimulator system, with the aim of providing visual information to profoundly visually impaired patients, allowing them to utilise this device at home.

Methods : Four patients (P1, P2, P3 and P4) with end-stage rod - cone dystrophy and perception of light visual acuity were implanted with a 44 channel electrode array in the suprachoroidal space during 2018 (NCT03406416). After recovery they commenced stimulation of the device in the psychophysics laboratory.
Post operative follow-up included clinical examination, fundus photography and optical coherence tomography (OCT) to assess surgical recovery and impact on the eye.
OCT imaging was used to track the retinotopic location of the leading edge of the implant. The translation and rotation of the array relative to baseline (1 week post-implantation) was calculated at 108 weeks post-implantation.
Primary outcome measure was safety as asessed by device related serious adverse events (SAEs), secondary measure efficacy as assessed by tests of visual function and functional vision.

Results : The surgical procedures were uncomplicated. At the completion of surgery, impedance testing showed in all electrodes were functional in all patients. Post operative recovery was uneventful . Fundus imaging and OCT imaging confirmed the position of the devices under the macula and the absence of retinal trauma.
No device related serious adverse events occurred during the two years of the study.
OCT imaging showed some minor movement of the device for all four patients. P3 had the most significant movement with 15 degrees of rotation at 108 weeks compared to baseline, however no functional changes were noted. Translational movement was minimal in all patients.

Conclusions : A 44 channel retinal prosthesis can be safely implanted in the suprachoroidal space, with no serious adverse events, device related or not, recorded for 4 patients. Over twenty four months of post operative follow-up clinical findings, fundus photography and OCT imaging confirm safety and stability of the suprachoroidal approach with only slight movement on OCT imaging, which is usually rotational. The devices were functional for the 24 months of the study and continue to be used in the home enviroment.

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.

×