Safety and efficacy of explanting or replacing suprachoroidal electrode arrays in a feline model

Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology

Volumn 43, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 247-258

  Leung, Ronald T ^a,b   Nayagam, David Ax ^a,b   Williams, Richard A ^b,d   Allen, Penelope J ^c   Salinas La Rosa, Cesar M ^d   Luu, Chi D ^c   Shivdasani, Mohit N ^a,c   Ayton, Lauren N ^c   Basa, Meri ^d   Yeoh, Jonathan ^c   Saunders, Alexia L ^a   Shepherd, Robert K ^a,c   Williams, Chris E ^a,c  

^a Bionics Institute   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^d ST VINCENT S HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

Electrodes; Foreign body reaction; Implanted; Reoperation; Visual prosthesis

Indexed keywords

SILICONE;

ADULT; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CHOROID; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE REMOVAL; DEVICE SAFETY; ELECTRODE; ELECTRODE IMPLANTATION; ELECTROSTIMULATION; ENUCLEATION; EVOKED CORTICAL RESPONSE; EXPLANT; EYE FUNDUS; EYE PHOTOGRAPHY; FELINE MODEL; HISTOPATHOLOGY; NONHUMAN; OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY; RETINA; RETINAL IMPLANT; SENSORY SYSTEM ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; STAPHYLOMA; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UVEA DISEASE; VISUAL CORTEX; ADVERSE EFFECTS; ANIMAL; CAT; DISEASE MODEL; ELECTRODE IMPLANT; ELECTRORETINOGRAPHY; FLUORESCENCE ANGIOGRAPHY; INTRAOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; MICROELECTRODE; PHYSIOLOGY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROCEDURES; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; REOPERATION; SURGERY; VISUAL EVOKED POTENTIAL; VISUAL PROSTHESIS;

ANIMALS; CATS; CHOROID; DEVICE REMOVAL; DISEASE MODELS, ANIMAL; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; ELECTRODES, IMPLANTED; ELECTRORETINOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; FLUORESCEIN ANGIOGRAPHY; INTRAOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; MICROELECTRODES; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; REOPERATION; RETINA; TOMOGRAPHY, OPTICAL COHERENCE; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL PROSTHESIS;

EID: 84928694801     PISSN: 14426404     EISSN: 14429071     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ceo.12428     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Marc RE, Jones BW, Watt CB, Strettoi E. Neural remodeling in retinal degeneration. Prog Retin Eye Res 2003; 22: 607-655.
2. Milam AH, Li ZY, Fariss RN. Histopathology of the human retina in retinitis pigmentosa. Prog Retin Eye Res 1998; 17: 175-205.
3. Zrenner E, Bartz-Schmidt KU, Benav H etal. Subretinal electronic chips allow blind patients to read letters and combine them to words. Proc Biol Sci 2011; 278: 1489-1497.
4. Ahuja AK, Dorn JD, Caspi A etal. Blind subjects implanted with the Argus II retinal prosthesis are able to improve performance in a spatial-motor task. Br J Ophthalmol 2011; 95: 539-543.
5. da Cruz L, Coley BF, Dorn J etal. The Argus II epiretinal prosthesis system allows letter and word reading and long-term function in patients with profound vision loss. Br J Ophthalmol 2013; 97: 632-636.
6. Roessler G, Laube T, Brockmann C etal. Implantation and explantation of a wireless epiretinal retina implant device: observations during the EPIRET3 prospective clinical trial. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2009; 50: 3003-3008.
7. Chow AY, Chow VY, Packo KH, Pollack JS, Peyman GA, Schuchard R. The artificial silicon retina microchip for the treatment of vision loss from retinitis pigmentosa. Arch Ophthalmol 2004; 122: 460-469.
8. Rizzo JF 3rd. Update on retinal prosthetic research: the Boston Retinal Implant Project. J Neuroophthalmol 2011; 31: 160-168.
9. Zhou JA, Woo SJ, Park SI etal. A suprachoroidal electrical retinal stimulator design for long-term animal experiments and in vivo assessment of its feasibility and biocompatibility in rabbits. J Biomed Biotechnol 2008; 547428.
10. Sakaguchi H, Fujikado T, Fang X etal. Transretinal electrical stimulation with a suprachoroidal multichannel electrode in rabbit eyes. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2004; 48: 256-261.
11. Villalobos J, Allen PJ, McCombe MF etal. Development of a surgical approach for a wide-view suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis: evaluation of implantation trauma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2012; 250: 399-407.
12. Saunders AL, Williams CE, Heriot W etal. Development of a surgical procedure for implantation of a prototype suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2014. doi: 10.1111/ceo.12287.
13. Villalobos J, Nayagam DA, Allen PJ etal. A wide-field suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis is stable and well tolerated following chronic implantation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2013; 54: 3751-3762.
14. Besch D, Sachs H, Szurman P etal. Extraocular surgery for implantation of an active subretinal visual prosthesis with external connections: feasibility and outcome in seven patients. Br J Ophthalmol 2008; 92: 1361-1368.
15. Fujikado T, Kamei M, Sakaguchi H etal. Testing of semichronically implanted retinal prosthesis by suprachoroidal-transretinal stimulation in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011; 52: 4726-4733.
16. Menzel-Severing J, Sellhaus B, Laube T etal. Surgical results and microscopic analysis of the tissue reaction following implantation and explantation of an intraocular implant for epiretinal stimulation in minipigs. Ophthalmic Res 2011; 46: 192-198.
17. Chen J, Shah HA, Herbert C, Loewenstein JI, Rizzo JF 3rd. Extraction of a chronically implanted, microfabricated, subretinal electrode array. Ophthalmic Res 2009; 42: 128-137.
18. Gekeler F, Kobuch K, Blatsios G, Zrenner E, Shinoda K. Repeated transchoroidal implantation and explantation of compound subretinal prostheses: an exploratory study in rabbits. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2010; 54: 467-475.
19. Polikov VS, Tresco PA, Reichert WM. Response of brain tissue to chronically implanted neural electrodes. J Neurosci Methods 2005; 148: 1-18.
20. John SE, Shivdasani MN, Leuenberger J etal. An automated system for rapid evaluation of high-density electrode arrays in neural prostheses. J Neural Eng 2011; 8: 036011.
21. Shivdasani MN, Fallon JB, Luu CD etal. Visual cortex responses to single- and simultaneous multiple-electrode stimulation of the retina: implications for retinal prostheses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2012; 53: 6291-6300.
22. Cicione R, Shivdasani MN, Fallon JB etal. Visual cortex responses to suprachoroidal electrical stimulation of the retina: effects of electrode return configuration. J Neural Eng 2012; 9: 36009-36023.
23. Nayagam DAX, McGowan C, Villalobos J etal. Techniques for processing eyes implanted with a retinal prosthesis for localized histopathological analysis. J Vis Exp 2013; 78: e50411.
24. Tusa R, Palmer L, Rosenquist A. The retinotopic organization of area 17 (striate cortex) in the cat. J Comp Neurol 1978; 177: 213-235.
25. Shepherd RK, Fallon JB, McDermott HJ. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Zhou SA, Zhou L, eds. Amsterdam: Elsevier, in press.
26. Gottsch JD. Hyphema: diagnosis and management. Retina 1990; 10 (Suppl. 1): S65-71.
27. Arbisser LB, Charles S, Howcroft M, Werner L. Management of vitreous loss and dropped nucleus during cataract surgery. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 2006; 19: 495-506.
28. Lang GK. Ophthalmology, 2nd edn. New York: Theime, 2007.
29. Slatter DH, ed. Textbook of Small Animal Surgery, 3rd edn. Philadelphia: Saunders, 2003.
30. Prince JH, Diesem CD, Eglitis I, Ruskell GL. Anatomy and Histology of the Eye and Orbit in Domestic Animals. Springfield: C.C. Thomas, 1960.
31. Olsen TW, Aaberg SY, Geroski DH, Edelhauser HF. Human sclera: thickness and surface area. Am J Ophthalmol 1998; 125: 237-241.
32. Trevor-Roper PD, Curran PV, eds. The Eye and Its Disorders, 2nd edn. St. Louis: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1984.
33. Wong YT, Chen SC, Seo JM, Morley JW, Lovell NH, Suaning GJ. Focal activation of the feline retina via a suprachoroidal electrode array. Vision Res 2009; 49: 825-833.
34. Thelin J, Jorntell H, Psouni E etal. Implant size and fixation mode strongly influence tissue reactions in the CNS. PLoS ONE 2011; 6: e16267.
35. Anderson JM, Rodriguez A, Chang DT. Foreign body reaction to biomaterials. Semin Immunol 2008; 20: 86-100.