The appearance of phosphenes elicited using a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 57, Issue 11, 2016, Pages 4948-4961

  Sinclair, Nicholas C ^a   Shivdasani, Mohit N ^a,b   Perera, Thushara ^a,b   Gillespie, Lisa N ^a   McDermott, Hugh J ^a,b   Ayton, Lauren N ^b   Blamey, Peter J ^a,b  

^a Bionics Institute   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bionic vision; Phosphene; Retinal prosthesis; Suprachoroidal

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CASE REPORT; CHOROID; CLINICAL TRIAL; ELECTRODE; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMPLANTATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OPHTHALMOSCOPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; RETINAL IMPLANT; RETINITIS PIGMENTOSA; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISION; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

EID: 84988932318     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.15-18991     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Zrenner E, Bartz-Schmidt KU, Benav H, et al. Subretinal electronic chips allow blind patients to read letters and combine them to words. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2010; rspb20101747.
2. Fujikado T, Kamei M, Sakaguchi H, et al. Testing of semichronically implanted retinal prosthesis by suprachoroidaltransretinal stimulation in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:4726-4733.
3. Humayun MS, Dorn JD, da Cruz L, et al. Interim results from the international trial of Second Sight’s visual prosthesis. Ophthalmology. 2012;119:779-788.
4. Shivdasani MN, Sinclair NC, Dimitrov PN, et al. Factors affecting perceptual thresholds in a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55:6467-6481.
5. Ayton LN, Blamey PJ, Guymer RH, et al. First-in-human trial of a novel suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. PLoS One. 2014;9:e115239.
6. Delbeke J, Oozeer M, Veraart C. Position size and luminosity of phosphenes generated by direct optic nerve stimulation. Vision Res. 2003;43:1091-1102.
7. Pezaris JS, Reid RC. Demonstration of artificial visual percepts generated through thalamic microstimulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104:7670-7675.
8. Brindley GS, Lewin W. The sensations produced by electrical stimulation of the visual cortex. J Physiol. 1968;196:479-493.
9. Dobelle W, Mladejovsky M. Phosphenes produced by electrical stimulation of human occipital cortex, and their application to the development of a prosthesis for the blind. J Physiol. 1974; 243:553-576.
10. Shepherd RK, Shivdasani MN, Nayagam DA, Williams CE, Blamey PJ. Visual prostheses for the blind. Trends Biotechnol. 2013;31:562-571.
11. Wilke R, Gabel V-P, Sachs H, et al. Spatial resolution and perception of patterns mediated by a subretinal 16-electrode array in patients blinded by hereditary retinal dystrophies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:5995-6003.
12. Humayun MS. Pattern electrical stimulation of the human retina. Vision Res. 1999;39:2569-2576.
13. Veraart C, Wanet-Defalque MC, Gérard B, Vanlierde A, Delbeke J. Pattern recognition with the optic nerve visual prosthesis. Artif Organs. 2003;27:996-1004.
14. Klauke S, Goertz M, Rein S, et al. Stimulation with a wireless intraocular epiretinal implant elicits visual percepts in blind humans. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:449-455.
15. Rizzo JF, Wyatt J, Loewenstein J, Kelly S, Shire D. Perceptual efficacy of electrical stimulation of human retina with a microelectrode array during short-term surgical trials. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:5362-5369.
16. Chen SC, Suaning GJ, Morley JW, Lovell NH. Simulating prosthetic vision: I. Visual models of phosphenes. Vision Res. 2009;49:1493-1506.
17. Thompson RW, Barnett GD, Humayun MS, Dagnelie G. Facial recognition using simulated prosthetic pixelized vision. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:5035-5042.
18. Nanduri D, Fine I, Horsager A, et al. Frequency and amplitude modulation have different effects on the percepts elicited by retinal stimulation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:205-214.
19. Nanduri D. Prosthetic Vision in Blind Human Patients:Predicting the Percepts of Epiretinal Stimulation [dissertation]. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California; 2011.
20. Humayun MS, Weiland JD, Fujii GY, et al. Visual perception in a blind subject with a chronic microelectronic retinal prosthesis. Vision Res. 2003;43:2573-2581.
21. Pérez Fornos A, Sommerhalder J, Da Cruz L, et al. Temporal properties of visual perception on electrical stimulation of the retina. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:2720-2731.
22. Stensaas SS, Eddington DK, Dobelle WH. The topography and variability of the primary visual cortex in man. J Neurosurg. 1974;40:747-755.
23. Drasdo N, Fowler C. Non-linear projection of the retinal image in a wide-angle schematic eye. Br J Ophthalmol. 1974;58:709.
24. Fitzgibbon T, Taylor S. Retinotopy of the human retinal nerve fibre layer and optic nerve head. J Comp Neurol. 1996;375:238-251.
25. Fine I, Boynton GM. Pulse trains to percepts: the challenge of creating a perceptually intelligible world with sight recovery technologies. Phil Trans R Soc B. 2015;370:20140208.
26. Stronks HC, Dagnelie G. Phosphene mapping techniques for visual prostheses. In: Visual Prosthetics. New York: Springer; 2011:367-383.
27. Saunders AL, Williams CE, Heriot W, et al. Development of a surgical procedure for implantation of a prototype suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2014; 42:665-674.
28. Villalobos J, Allen PJ, McCombe MF, et al. 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.
29. Kanda H, Morimoto T, Fujikado T, Tano Y, Fukuda Y, Sawai H. Electrophysiological studies of the feasibility of suprachoroidal-transretinal stimulation for artificial vision in normal and RCS rats. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:560-566.
30. Yamauchi Y, Franco LM, Jackson DJ, et al. Comparison of electrically evoked cortical potential thresholds generated with subretinal or suprachoroidal placement of a microelectrode array in the rabbit. J Neural Eng. 2005;2:S48.
31. Slater KD, Sinclair NC, Nelson TS, Blamey PJ, McDermott HJ. neuroBi: a highly configurable neurostimulator for a retinal prosthesis and other applications. IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med. 2015;3:1-11.
32. Greenwald SH, Horsager A, Humayun MS, Greenberg RJ, McMahon MJ, Fine I. Brightness as a function of current amplitude in human retinal electrical stimulation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:5017-5025.
33. Shannon RV. A model of safe levels for electrical stimulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1992;39:424-426.
34. Merrill DR, Bikson M, Jefferys JG. Electrical stimulation of excitable tissue: design of efficacious and safe protocols. J Neurosci Methods. 2005;141:171-198.
35. Wong Y, Chen S, Seo J, Morley J, Lovell N, Suaning G. Focal activation of the feline retina via a suprachoroidal electrode array. Vision Res. 2009;49:825-833.
36. Matteucci PB, Chen SC, Tsai D, et al. Current steering in retinal stimulation via a quasimonopolar stimulation paradigm. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54:4307-4320.
37. Sabbah N, Authié CN, Sanda N, Mohand-Said S, Sahel J-A, Safran AB. Importance of eye position on spatial localization in blind subjects wearing an Argus II retinal prosthesis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55:8259-8266.
38. Dacey DM, Petersen MR. Dendritic field size and morphology of midget and parasol ganglion cells of the human retina. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992;89:9666-9670.
39. Moshtagh N. Minimum Volume Enclosing Ellipsoid. Matlab Central. Available at: http://au.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/9542-minimum-volume-enclosing-ellipsoid. Accessed June 25, 2015.
40. Miller GA, Nicely PE. An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. J Acoust Soc Am. 1955;27:338-352.
41. Blamey P, Dowell R, Brown A, Clark GM, Seligman P. Vowel and consonant recognition of cochlear implant patients using formant-estimating speech processors. J Acoust Soc Am. 1987; 82:48-57.
42. Blamey PJ, Cowan RS, Alcantara JI, Whitford LA, Clark GM. Speech perception using combinations of auditory visual, and tactile information. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1989;26:15-24.
43. Sagi E, Svirsky MA. Information transfer analysis: a first look at estimation bias. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008;123:2848-2857.
44. Kolb H. How the retina works. Am Sci. 2003;91:28-35.
45. Fried SI, Hsueh H-A, Werblin FS. A method for generating precise temporal patterns of retinal spiking using prosthetic stimulation. J Neurophysiol. 2006;95:970-978.
46. Sekirnjak C, Hottowy P, Sher A, Dabrowski W, Litke A, Chichilnisky E. Electrical stimulation of mammalian retinal ganglion cells with multielectrode arrays. J Neurophysiol. 2006;95:3311-3327.
47. Tsai D, Morley JW, Suaning GJ, Lovell NH. Direct activation and temporal response properties of rabbit retinal ganglion cells following subretinal stimulation. J Neurophysiol. 2009;102:2982-2993.
48. Cai C, Ren Q, Desai NJ, Rizzo JF, Fried SI. Response variability to high rates of electric stimulation in retinal ganglion cells. J Neurophysiol. 2011;106:153-162.
49. Cai C, Twyford P, Fried S. The response of retinal neurons to high-frequency stimulation. J Neural Eng. 2013;10:036009.
50. Watson AB. Temporal sensitivity. In: Boff K, Kaufman L, Thomas J, eds. Handbook of Perception and Human Performance. New York, NY: Wiley; 1986:6.1-6.43.
51. Cicione R, Shivdasani MN, Fallon JB, et al. Visual cortex responses to suprachoroidal electrical stimulation of the retina: effects of electrode return configuration. J Neural Eng. 2012;9:036009.