Cited by 700Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringRetinal Development and DisordersTactile and Sensory Interactions

Interim results from the international trial of Second Sight's visual prosthesis

Open access
Humayun, Mark S., Dorn, Jessy D., da Cruz, Lyndon, Dagnelie, Gislin, Sahel, José-Alain, Stanga, Paulo E., Cideciyan, Artur V., Duncan, Jacque L. +8 more·2012·Ophthalmology

Abstract

Purpose This study evaluated the Argus II Retinal Prosthesis System (Second Sight Medical Products, Inc., Sylmar, CA) in blind subjects with severe outer retinal degeneration.Design Single-arm, prospective, multicenter clinical trial.Participants Thirty subjects were enrolled in the United States and Europe between June 6, 2007, and August 11, 2009. All subjects were followed up for a minimum of 6 months and up to 2.7 years.Methods The electronic stimulator and antenna of the implant were 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 then was tacked to the epiretinal surface.Main outcome measures The primary safety end points for the trial were the number, severity, and relation of adverse events. Principal performance end points were assessments of visual function as well as performance on orientation and mobility tasks.Results Subjects performed statistically better with the system on versus 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 versus 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 treated successfully in all subjects except in one, who required explantation of the device without further complications.Conclusions The long-term safety results of Second Sight's retinal prosthesis system are acceptable, and most subjects with profound visual loss perform better on visual tasks with system than without it.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.028

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Epiretinal implants electrically activate retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) that have survived degeneration, causing them to send artificial visual signals to the brain.

    “Epiretinal implants electrically activate retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) that have survived degeneration, causing them to send artificial visual signals to the brain.”
  • Visual neuroprostheses have been implanted in the retina, optic nerve, and visual cortex of human subjects.

    “To date, visual neuroprostheses have been implanted in the retina (Humayun et al. 2012; Stingl et al. 2013; Fujikado et al. 2016; Petoe et al. 2021; Barnes et al. 2016; Palanker et al. 2022; Xu et al. 2021), optic nerve (Veraart et al. 2003), and visual cortex of human subjects (Beauchamp et al. 2020; Fernández et al. 2021).”
  • The highest visual acuity achieved with the Argus II is only about 20/1260, which is dictated by the 550 μm electrode spacing.

    “Moreover, the highest level of visual acuity achieved is only about 20/1260 (Humayun et al. 2012), which is dictated by the 550 μm electrode spacing.”
  • People with blindness using an Argus device improved on orientation and mobility tasks involving walking toward a high-contrast target and along a high-contrast line on the floor.

    “When receiving visual input from an Argus device, people with blindness improved on orientation and mobility tasks based on walking towards a high-contrast target and walking along a high-contrast line on the floor (Humayun et al. 2012).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Humayun, M. S., Dorn, J. D., da Cruz, L., Dagnelie, G., Sahel, J.-A., Stanga, P. E., Cideciyan, A. V., Duncan, J. L., Eliott, D., Filley, E., Ho, A. C., Santos, A., Safran, A. B., Arditi, A., Del Priore, L. V., & Greenberg, R. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Second Sight Medical Products (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Centre hospitalier national d'ophtalmologie des Quinze-Vingts (FR)
  • Manchester Royal Eye Hospital (GB)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (US)
  • Retina Foundation of the Southwest (US)
  • Wills Eye Hospital (US)
  • Centro de Retina Médica y Quirúrgica (MX)
  • University Hospital of Geneva (CH)
  • Lighthouse Guild (US)
Corresponding author
Humayun, Mark S.
Venue
Ophthalmology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-04
Volume
119
Issue
4
Pages
779-788
ISSN
0161-6420 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2085039801
Cited by
700
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 66 · 2016: 76 · 2015: 78 · 2014: 72 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 19
FWCI
29.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (5R01EY012893-10)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinal Development and Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
Argus II retinal prosthesis, retinal prosthesis, retinitis pigmentosa, outer retinal degeneration, visual function, orientation and mobility, device safety, adverse events, conjunctival erosion, pars plana vitrectomy, microelectrode arrays
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Blindness, Electrodes, Implanted, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Feasibility Studies, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Microelectrodes, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Retina, Retinal Degeneration, Sclera, Sclerostomy, Sensory Thresholds, Visual Acuity, Visual Perception, Vitrectomy, Tomography, Optical Coherence, Visual Prosthesis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review