Visual prosthesis: interfacing stimulating electrodes with retinal neurons to restore vision.
Open accessAbstract
The bypassing of degenerated photoreceptors using retinal neurostimulators is helping the blind to recover functional vision. Researchers are investigating new ways to improve visual percepts elicited by these means as the vision produced by these early devices remain rudimentary. However, several factors are hampering the progression of bionic technologies: the charge injection limits of metallic electrodes, the mechanical mismatch between excitable tissue and the stimulating elements, neural and electric crosstalk, the physical size of the implanted devices, and the inability to selectively activate different types of retinal neurons. Electrochemical and mechanical limitations are being addressed by the application of electromaterials such as conducting polymers, carbon nanotubes and nanocrystalline diamonds, among other biomaterials, to electrical neuromodulation. In addition, the use of synthetic hydrogels and cell-laden biomaterials is promising better interfaces, as it opens a door to establishing synaptic connections between the electrode material and the excitable cells. Finally, new electrostimulation approaches relying on the use of high-frequency stimulation and field overlapping techniques are being developed to better replicate the neural code of the retina. All these elements combined will bring bionic vision beyond its present state and into the realm of a viable, mainstream therapy for vision loss.
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?
Crosstalk or interference between stimulating electrode sites and the multiplexing of stimulation channels are relevant issues.
“Other relevant issues in this framework are the so-called “crosstalk” or interference between stimulating electrode sites and the multiplexing of stimulation channels (Barriga-Rivera et al., 2017).”
From Toward Long-Term Communication With the Brain in the Blind by Intracortical Stimulation: Challenges and Future Prospects (2020) · cites this paper as Barriga-Rivera et al., 2017
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 193 · Cited by 73
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- David-Pur M. Bareket-Keren L. Beit-Yaakov G. Raz-Prag D. Rand D. Hanein Y. (2013). Carbon-nanotube based flexible electrodes for retinal recording and stimulation, in SENSORS, IEEE, Vol. 2013 (Baltimore, MD: IEEE), 1– 4.
- Authors
- Barriga-Rivera, A., Bareket, L., Goding, J., Aregueta-Robles, U. A., & Suaning, G. J.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Imperial College London (GB)
- Venue
- Frontiers in Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2017-11-14
- Volume
- 11
- Pages
- 620-620
- ISSN
- 1662-453X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5694472
- OpenAlex
- W2773022913
- Cited by
- 73
- References
- 193
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4
- FWCI
- 0.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Frontiers in Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Health and Medical Research Council (RG1063046, RG1109056)
- Australian Research Council (LP140100403)
- 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
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Polymers and Plastics › Conducting polymers and applications
- Keywords
- retinal prosthesis, vision restoration, retinal degeneration, charge injection limit, metal electrodes, conducting polymers, carbon nanotubes, nanocrystalline diamond, synthetic hydrogels, synaptic connectivity, high-frequency stimulation, bionic 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