Scientific Online Resource System

Bulgarian Review of Ophthalmology

Epiretinal vs. subretinal implant in surgical treatment of retinitis pigmentosa – a review

Pavlina Pavlova, Julia Boneva, Ilian Shandurkov

Abstract

The purpose of this review is to present the development of retinal chips in the surgical treatment of retinitis pigmentosa. The technological opportunities, surgical techniques and results in terms of vision in conceptually different subretinal and epiretinal implants are reported, as well as technological developments and expected future progress on the basis of published results from the R&D centers producing this type of chips. At this stage in the development of medicine, inserting a retinal implant is the only way to regain vision for patients with retinitis pigmentosa at the end stage of the disease. It is still difficult to determine which of the implant types gives better results in the long run and which among them might give rise to less undesirable side effects. The information available in the literature provides encouraging outcomes for vision’s recovery in patients with late-onset pigment retinitis.


Keywords

retinitis pigmentosa, sub and epiretinal implant, surgical treatment

Full Text


References

Gene C. Genetics Home Reference. Natl Libr Med. 2018;16:1-6. doi:10.1530/EJE-17-0430.

Ludwig PE, Freeman SC, Janot AC. Novel stem cell and gene therapy in diabetic retinopathy, age related macular degeneration, and retinitis pigmentosa. Int J Retin Vitr. 2019;5(1):7. doi:10.1186/s40942-019-0158-y

Lin MK, Tsai YT, Tsang SH. Emerging Treatments for Retinitis Pigmentosa: Genes and stem cells, as well as new electronic and medical therapies, are gaining ground. Retin Physician. 2015;12:52-70.

Tao Y, Chen T, Liu B, Wang LQ, Peng GH, Qin LM, et al. The transcorneal electrical stimulation as a novel therapeutic strategy against retinal and optic neuropathy: a review of experimental and clinical trials. Int J Ophthalmol. 2016; 9(6):914-9. doi:10.18240/ijo.2016.06.21

Lewis PM, Rosenfeld J V. Electrical stimulation of the brain and the development of cortical visual prostheses: An historical perspective. Brain Res. 2016;1630(December):208-224. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2015.08.038

da Cruz L, Dorn JD, Humayun MS, Dagnelie G, Handa J, Barale PO, et al. Five-year safety and performance results from the Argus II Retinal Prosthesis System Clinical Trial. Ophthalmology. 2016;123(10):2248-54. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.06.049 [Pub Med]

Sahel J-A, Korobelnik J-F, Mohand-Saïd S, Cougnard-Grégoire A, Korobelnik JF, Ajana S, et al. Adapted surgical procedure for Argus II retinal implantation: Feasibility, safety, efficiency, and postoperative anatomic findings. Ophthalmol Retin. 2017;2(4):276-87. doi:10.1016/j.oret.2017.08.010

Ho AC, Humayun MS, Dorn JD, da Cruz L, Dagnelie G, Handa J, et al. Long-term results from an epiretinal prosthesis to restore sight to the blind. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(8):1547-54. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.04.032 9. Sight S. Argus ® II Retinal Prosthesis System Surgeon Manual. 2013. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf11/h110002c.pdf

Edwards TL, Cottriall CL, Xue K, Simunovic MP, Ramsden JD, Zrenner E, et al. Assessment of the electronic retinal implant Alpha AMS in restoring vision to blind patients with end-stage retinitis pigmentosa. Ophthalmology. 2017;125(3):432-43. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.09.019

Roux S, Matonti F, Dupont F, Hoffart L, Takerkart S, Picaud S, et al. Probing the functional impact of sub-retinal prosthesis. Elife. 2016;5(AUGUST):1-26. doi:10.7554/eLife.12687

Wang L, Mathieson K, Kamins TI, Loudin JD, Galambos L, Goetz G, et al. Photovoltaic retinal prosthesis: implant fabrication and performance. J Neural Eng. 2012;9(4):046014. doi: 10.1088/1741-2560/9/4/046014




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14748/bro.v63i1.5814

Refbacks

Font Size


About The Authors

Pavlina Pavlova
VISION Eye Hospital, Sofia
Bulgaria

Julia Boneva
VISION Eye Hospital, Sofia
Bulgaria

Ilian Shandurkov
VISION Eye Hospital, Sofia
Bulgaria

|