CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 202Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringRetinal Development and DisordersTactile and Sensory Interactions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 104 of the 106 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Advances in retinal prosthesis systems

Open access
Bloch, Edward, Luo, Yvonne, da Cruz, Lyndon·2019·Therapeutic Advances in Ophthalmology
DOI 10.1177/2515841418817501PMC PMC6350159
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Retinal prosthesis systems have undergone significant advances in the past quarter century, resulting in the development of several different novel surgical and engineering approaches. Encouraging results have demonstrated partial visual restoration, with improvement in both coarse objective function and performance of everyday tasks. To date, four systems have received marketing approval for use in Europe or the United States, with numerous others undergoing preclinical and clinical evaluation, reflecting the established safety profile of these devices for chronic implantation. This progress represents the first notion that the field of visual restorative medicine could offer blind patients a hope of real and measurable benefit. However, there are numerous complex engineering and biophysical obstacles still to be overcome, to reconcile the gap that remains between artificial and natural vision. Current developments in the form of enhanced image processing algorithms and data transfer approaches, combined with emerging nanofabrication and conductive polymerization techniques, herald an exciting and innovative future for retinal prosthetics. This review provides an update of retinal prosthetic systems currently undergoing development and clinical trials while also addressing future challenges in the field, such as the assessment of functional outcomes in ultra-low vision and strategies for tackling existing hardware and software constraints.

Overview

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 · 10.1177/2515841418817501

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1. The Argus II Retinal Prosthesis System. Source: Adapted from Second Sight Medical Products, Inc., Sylmar, CA, USA.
Figure 1. The Argus II Retinal Prosthesis System. Source: Adapted from Second Sight Medical Products, Inc., Sylmar, CA, USA.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 2. The Intelligent Retinal Implant System (IRIS) II. Source: Adapted from Pixium Vision S.A., Paris, France.
Figure 2. The Intelligent Retinal Implant System (IRIS) II. Source: Adapted from Pixium Vision S.A., Paris, France.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 3. The EPI-RET3 Retinal Prosthesis System. Source: EPI-RET3 Team, RWTH Aachen, Germany.
Figure 3. The EPI-RET3 Retinal Prosthesis System. Source: EPI-RET3 Team, RWTH Aachen, Germany.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 4. The Retina Implant Alpha AMS System. Source: Adapted from Retina Implant AG, Reutlingen, Germany.
Figure 4. The Retina Implant Alpha AMS System. Source: Adapted from Retina Implant AG, Reutlingen, Germany.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 5. Schematic of the Photovoltaic Retinal Implant (PRIMA) Bionic Vision System. Inset: device in a patient with geographic atrophy. Source: Adapted from Palanker et al, Stanford University, and Pixium Vision S.A., Paris, France.
Figure 5. Schematic of the Photovoltaic Retinal Implant (PRIMA) Bionic Vision System. Inset: device in a patient with geographic atrophy. Source: Adapted from Palanker et al, Stanford University, and Pixium Vision S.A., Paris, France.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 106 references

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Medeiros NE, 2001, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 42, 795
  2. Foerster O., 1929, J Psychol Neurol, 39, 463
  3. Potts AM, 1969, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 8, 605
  4. Humayun MS, 2009, Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, 2009, 4566
  5. Stanga PE, 2012, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 53, 6952
  6. Richard G, 2005, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 46, 1143
  7. Keserü M, 2009, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 50, 4226
  8. Richard G, 2005, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 49, 1786
  9. Zhou M, 2008, Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, 43, 2003
  10. Hornig R, 2016, Artificial vision, 99
  11. Walter P, 2016, Artificial vision, 151
  12. Schloesser M, SENSORS, 1
  13. Rizzo JF, 2011, Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, 2011, 3135
  14. Chow AY, 2010, Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc, 108, 120
  15. Zrenner E, 2016, Artificial vision, 65
  16. Gekeler F, 2013, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 54, 1036
  17. Lorach H, 2016, Artificial vision, 115
  18. Ayton LN, 2016, Artificial vision, 125
  19. Allen PJ, 2015, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 56, 750
  20. Fujikado T., 2016, Artificial vision, 139
  21. Endo T, 2018, Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 48, 62
  22. 10.1097/00006324-199807000-00022 · DOI
  23. Hazel CA, 2000, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 41, 1309
  24. Sommerhalder J, 2016, Artificial vision, 29
  25. Ruben G, 2016, Artificial vision, 9
  26. Gulati R, 2011, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 52, 1197
  27. Jeong J, 2013, Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, 2013, 5295
  28. Sahel J, 2013, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 54, 1389
  29. Stanga P, 2013, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 54, 1766

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–202 of 202

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bloch, E., Luo, Y., & da Cruz, L.
Affiliations
  • Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, UK
Corresponding author
Bloch, Edward
ORCID
Venue
Therapeutic Advances in Ophthalmology
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2019-01
Volume
11
Pages
2515841418817501-2515841418817501
ISSN
2515-8414 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1177/2515841418817501
PMC
PMC6350159
OpenAlex
W2909244976
Cited by
201
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 80 · 2019: 9
FWCI
4.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Therapeutic Advances in Ophthalmology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Development and Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
retinal prosthesis, vision restoration, blindness, image processing algorithms, data transmission, nanofabrication, conducting polymers, functional outcome assessment, clinical trials, artificial vision

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