Factors affecting perceptual thresholds in epiretinal prostheses
Open accessAbstract
PURPOSE: The goal was to evaluate how perceptual thresholds are related to electrode impedance, electrode size, the distance of electrodes from the retinal surface, and retinal thickness in six subjects blind as a result of retinitis pigmentosa, who received epiretinal prostheses implanted monocularly as part of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved clinical trial. METHODS: The implant consisted of an extraocular unit containing electronics for wireless data, power recovery, and generation of stimulus current, and an intraocular unit containing 16 platinum stimulating electrodes (260- or 520-microm diameter) arranged in a 4 x 4 pattern. The electrode array was held onto the retina by a small tack. Stimulation was controlled by a computer-based external system that allowed independent control over each electrode. Perceptual thresholds (the current necessary to see a percept on 79% of trials) and impedance were measured for each electrode on a biweekly basis. The distance of electrodes from the retinal surface and retinal thickness were measured by optical coherence tomography on a less regular basis. RESULTS: Stimulation thresholds for detecting phosphenes correlated with the distance of the electrodes from the retinal surface, but not with electrode size, electrode impedance, or retinal thickness. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining close proximity between the electrode array and the retinal surface is critical in developing a successful retinal implant. With the development of chronic electrode arrays that are stable and flush on the retinal surface, it is likely that the influence of other factors such as electrode size, retinal degeneration, and subject age will become more apparent. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00279500.).
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?
Phosphenes tended to appear larger and rounder as stimulus amplitude increased.
“We found that phosphenes tended to appear larger and rounder as stimulus amplitude increased (table 4), which is consistent with previous considerations about the current spread in the retina (de Balthasar et al 2008, Granley and Beyeler 2021, Yücel et al 2022).”
From Axonal stimulation affects the linear summation of single-point perception in three Argus II users (2024) · cites this paper as de Balthasar et al 2008
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 55 · Cited by 204
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [31]Tucci DL, Niparko JK. Medical and surgical aspects of cochlear implantation. In: Niparko JK, Kirk KI, Mellon NK, Robbins AM, Tucci DL, Wilson BS, editors. Cochlear Implants Principles Practices. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Philadelphia: 2000. pp. 189–221. [Google Scholar]
- Authors
- de Balthasar, C., Patel, S., Roy, A., Freda, R., Greenwald, S., Horsager, A., Mahadevappa, M., Yanai, D., McMahon, M. J., Humayun, M. S., Greenberg, R. J., Weiland, J. D., & Fine, I.
- Affiliations
- From the Department of Ophthalmology and Zilkha Neurogenetic Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California;
- University of Southern California (US)
- Second Sight Medical Products (US)
- Venue
- Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
- Published
- 2008-06-01
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2303
- ISSN
- 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-5783
- PMC
- PMC2517253
- OpenAlex
- W2166494495
- Cited by
- 204
- References
- 55
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 19
- FWCI
- 7.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration
- National Eye Institute (R01EY014645, R24EY012893, EY012893, R01EY012893)
- 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
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
- Keywords
- epiretinal prosthesis, retinitis pigmentosa, perceptual thresholds, electrode impedance, electrode size, retinal thickness, phosphenes, retinal prosthesis, visual prosthesis
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Electrodes, Implanted, Electroretinography, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Fluorescein Angiography, Humans, Microelectrodes, Middle Aged, Photography, Retina, Retinitis Pigmentosa, Sensory Thresholds, Visual Acuity, Visual Perception, Electric Impedance, Prostheses and Implants, Tomography, Optical Coherence
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