Postmortem investigation of a human cortical visual prosthesis that was implanted for 36 years
Open accessAbstract
Objective: Postmortem analysis of the brain from a blind human subject who had a cortical visual prosthesis implanted for 36 years (Dobelle 2000 Asaio J. 46 3–9) Approach: This provided insight into the design requirements for a successful human cortical visual prosthesis by revealing, (a) unexpected rotation of the electrode array 25 to 40 degrees away from the midsagittal plane, thought to be due to the torque of the connecting cable, (b) degradation of the platinum electrodes, and (c) only partial coverage of the primary visual cortex by the rectangular array. The electrode array only overlapped with the anterior 45% of primary visual cortex (identified by the line of Gennari), largely missing the posterior foveal representation of visual cortex. Main results: A significantly greater proportions of electrodes outside of V1 elicited phosphenes than did electrodes within of V1. Histology did not reveal appreciable loss of neurons in cortex that surrounded the migrated array, perhaps due to the very slow rotation of this implant. Significance: This pioneering effort to develop a cortical visual prosthesis suggests that to maximize efficacy, the long-term effects of implanted alien materials on nervous tissue, and vice versa, need to be considered in detail, and that electrode array design considerations need to optimally match the electrodes to the patient’s cortical anatomy. Modern pre-implant imaging can help optimize future implants by identifying the location and extent of bridging veins with MRI and even map the location of the V1/V2 border in vivo with PET.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
In cortical prostheses, phosphene location depends on numerous factors, including the individual's specific retinotopic maps and displacement or degradation of the cortical implant over time.
“In the case of cortical prostheses, phosphene location depends on numerous factors, including the individual’s specific retinotopic maps and displacement or degradation of the cortical implant over time.58”
From Visual Prostheses in the Era of Artificial Intelligence Technology (2025) · cites this paper as [58]
Section 3.2 links electrode position relative to cortical sulci with where phosphenes appeared, and the Abstract reports that the array rotated over time. But section 4.4 says this subject’s unusual phosphene pattern could not be explained by unusual cortical anatomy, while section 4.2 documents electrode degradation without showing that it changed phosphene locations. The paper therefore supports implant placement as relevant, but not all the claimed factors as determinants of location. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredEpicortical prostheses are less invasive since they do not penetrate the brain, as confirmed by a post-mortem study on a patient implanted by Dobelle who retained the epicortical array for 36 years.
“Epicortical prostheses are less invasive since they do not penetrate the brain, as confirmed by a post-mortem study on a patient implanted by Dobelle, who retained the epicortical array for 36 years (figure 6(c)) [77].”
From Advances in visual prostheses: engineering and biological challenges (2022) · cites this paper as [77]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 11
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Agnew W F, Mccreery B B, Yuen T G H and Bullara L A 1990 Effects of prolonged electrical stimulation of the central nervous system Neural Prostheses: Fundamental Studies, ed W F Agnew and D B Mccreery (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall) pp 226-52
- Brindley G S 1973 Sensory effects of electrical stimulation of the visual and paravisual cortex in man Handbook of Sensory Physiology vol VII, ed R Jung (Berlin: Springer) pp 583-94
- Brindley G S and Rushton D N 1974 Implanted stimulators of the visual cortex as visual prosthetic devices Trans. Am. Acad. Ophthalmol. Otolaryngol. 78 OP741-5
- Kraus F and Schum H 1931 Neue deutsche Chirugle vol 49a (Stuttgart: Enke) pp 482
- Authors
- Towle, V. L., Pytel, P., Lane, F., Plass, J., Frim, D. M., & Troyk, P. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Chicago (US)
- Illinois Institute of Technology (US)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Towle, Vernon L
- Venue
- Journal of Neural Engineering
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2020-07-23
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 045010
- ISSN
- 1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-2560
- OpenAlex
- W3034731320
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 0.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Neural Engineering (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- NIH (NIH-1UG3 NS095557- 01A1)
- U.S. Army (USAMRMC-W81XWH-12-1-0394)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
- Keywords
- cortical visual prosthesis, blind patients, phosphenes, electrode array design
- MeSH terms
- Electric Stimulation, Electrodes, Implanted, Humans, Phosphenes, Visual Cortex, 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