Purpose This study evaluates the Argus™ II Retinal Prosthesis System in blind subjects with severe outer retinal degeneration. Design The study design is a single arm, prospective, multicenter clinical trial. Participants Thirty subjects were enrolled in the United States and Europe between 6 June 2007 and 11 August 2009. All subjects were followed for a minimum of six months and up to 2.7 years. Methods The electronic stimulator and antenna of the implant was sutured onto the sclera using an encircling silicone band. Next, a pars plana vitrectomy was performed and the electrode array and cable were introduced into the eye via a pars plana sclerotomy. The microelectrode array was then tacked to the epiretinal surface. Main Outcome Measures The primary safety endpoint for the trial was the number, severity, and relation of adverse events. Principal performance endpoints were assessments of visual function as well as performance on orientation and mobility tasks. Results Subjects performed statistically better with system ON vs. OFF in the following tasks: object localization (96% of subjects); motion discrimination (57%); and discrimination of oriented gratings (23%). The best recorded visual acuity to date is 20/1260. Subjects’ mean performance on Orientation and Mobility tasks was significantly better when the System was ON vs. OFF. Seventy percent of the patients did not have any serious adverse events (SAEs). The most common SAE reported was either conjunctival erosion or dehiscence over the extraocular implant and was successfully treated in all subjects except in one which required explantation of the device without further complications. Conclusions The long-term safety results of Second Sight’s retinal prosthesis system are acceptable and the majority of subjects with profound visual loss perform better on visual tasks with system than without.
Purpose The Argus® II Retinal Prosthesis System (Second Sight Medical Products, Inc., Sylmar, CA) was developed to restore some vision to patients blind from retinitis pigmentosa (RP) or outer retinal degeneration. A clinical trial was initiated in 2006 to study the long-term safety and efficacy of the Argus II System in patients with bare or no light perception due to end-stage RP. Design The study is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, clinical trial. Within-patient controls included the non-implanted fellow eye and patients' native residual vision compared to their vision when using the System. Subjects There were 30 subjects in 10 centers in the U.S. and Europe. Methods The worse-seeing eye of blind patients was implanted with the Argus II System. Patients wore glasses mounted with a small camera and a video processor that converted images into stimulation patterns sent to the electrode array on the retina. Main Outcome Measures The primary outcome measures were safety (the number, seriousness, and relatedness of adverse events) and visual function, as measured by three computer-based, objective tests. Secondary measures included functional vision performance on objectively-scored real-world tasks. Results Twenty-four out of 30 patients remained implanted with functioning Argus II Systems at 5 years post-implant. Only one additional serious adverse event was experienced since the 3-year time point. Patients performed significantly better with the System ON than OFF on all visual function tests and functional vision tasks. Conclusions The five-year results of the Argus II trial support the long-term safety profile and benefit of the Argus II System for patients blind from RP. The Argus II is the first and only retinal implant to have market approval in the European Economic Area, the United States, and Canada.
Purpose Retinitis Pigmentosa (RP) is a group of inherited retinal degenerations leading to blindness due to photoreceptor loss. A rare disease, it affects about 100,000 people in the United States. There is no cure and no approved medical therapy to slow or reverse RP. The purpose of this clinical trial was to evaluate the safety, reliability, and benefit of the Argus® II Retinal Prosthesis System (Second Sight Medical Products, Inc., Sylmar, CA) in restoring some visual function to subjects completely blind from RP. Herein, we report clinical trial results at 1 and 3 years post-implant. Design The study is a multicenter, single-arm, prospective clinical trial. Subjects There were 30 subjects in 10 centers in the U.S. and Europe. Subjects served as their own controls – i.e., implanted eye vs. fellow eye, and System ON vs. System OFF (native residual vision). Methods The Argus II System was implanted on and in a single eye (typically the worse-seeing eye) of blind subjects. Subjects wore glasses mounted with a small camera and a video processor that converted images into stimulation patterns sent to the electrode array on the retina. Main Outcome Measures The primary outcome measures were safety (the number, seriousness, and relatedness of adverse events) and visual function, as measured by three computer-based, objective tests. Results Twenty-nine out of 30 subjects remained implanted with functioning Argus II Systems at 3 years post-implant. Eleven subjects experienced a total of 23 serious device- or surgery-related adverse events. All were treated with standard ophthalmic care. As a group, subjects performed significantly better with the System ON than OFF on all visual function tests and functional vision assessments. Conclusions The three-year results of the Argus II trial support the long-term safety profile and benefit of the Argus II System for patients blind from RP. Earlier results from this trial were used to gain approval of the Argus II by the FDA and a CE Mark in Europe. The Argus II System is the first and only retinal implant to have both approvals.
Reading of isolated words in conditions mimicking artificial vision has been found to be a difficult but feasible task. In particular at relatively high eccentricities, a significant adaptation process was required to reach optimal performances [Vision Res. 43 (2003) 269]. The present study addressed the task of full-page reading, including page navigation under control of subject's own eye movements. Conditions of artificial vision mimicking a retinal implant were simulated by projecting stimuli with reduced information content (lines of pixelised text) onto a restricted and eccentric area of the retina. Three subjects, naïve to the task, were trained for almost two months (about 1 h/day) to read full-page texts. Subjects had to use their own eye movements to displace a 10 degrees x 7 degrees viewing window, stabilised at 15 degrees eccentricity in their lower visual field. Initial reading scores were very low for two subjects (about 13% correctly read words), and astonishingly high for the third subject (86% correctly read words). However, all of them significantly improved their performance with time, reaching close to perfect reading scores (ranging from 86% to 98% correct) at the end of the training process. Reading rates were as low as 1-5 words/min at the beginning of the experiment and increased significantly with time to 14-28 words/min. Qualitative text understanding was also estimated. We observed that reading scores of at least 85% correct were necessary to achieve 'good' text understanding. Gaze position recordings, made during the experimental sessions, demonstrated that the control of eye movements, especially the suppression of reflexive vertical saccades, constituted an important part of the overall adaptive learning process. Taken together, these results suggest that retinal implants might restore full-page text reading abilities to blind patients. About 600 stimulation contacts, distributed on an implant surface of 3 x 2 mm2, appear to be a minimum to allow for useful reading performance. A significant learning process will however be required to reach optimal performance with such devices, especially if they have to be placed outside the foveal area.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.