Jonathan D Shirian, Alex Yuan, Aleksandra Rachitskaya
{"title":"Long-Term Outcomes and Patient Experiences With the Argus II Retinal Prosthesis System.","authors":"Jonathan D Shirian, Alex Yuan, Aleksandra Rachitskaya","doi":"10.1177/24741264251376042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To evaluate the long-term outcomes and experiences of patients with the Argus II retinal prosthesis in individuals with advanced-stage retinitis pigmentosa. <b>Methods:</b> Chart review was conducted on 13 patients with the Argus II implant between June 2015 and February 2018 at the Cleveland Clinic Cole Eye Institute. Data collected included examination findings, adverse events, device usage, impact on quality of life, and patient satisfaction. <b>Results:</b> The average age of patients at implantation was 71 years, with 84.6% being male. All patients had severe visual impairment prior to surgery. Four patients experienced serious adverse events, including conjunctival erosion, vitreous hemorrhage, persistent corneal abrasion, and vertigo. None of the 10 patients who had recent follow-up appointments were currently using the device, with an average ± SD usage duration of 3.34 ± 2.65 years. Discontinuation reasons included performance issues, cognitive load, and physical discomfort, among others. Five patients reported that with the knowledge they currently have, they would choose to receive the implant again. <b>Conclusions:</b> Argus II provided potential benefits but also presented significant challenges related to device performance, cognitive demands, and long-term support. The cessation of commercial operations by the manufacturer and the resulting lack of support further complicated the experiences of patients. Despite this, the device remains a pioneering step in retinitis pigmentosa treatment, underscoring the need for ongoing innovation in visual prosthesis technology.</p>","PeriodicalId":17919,"journal":{"name":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"24741264251376042"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12496445/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/24741264251376042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the long-term outcomes and experiences of patients with the Argus II retinal prosthesis in individuals with advanced-stage retinitis pigmentosa. Methods: Chart review was conducted on 13 patients with the Argus II implant between June 2015 and February 2018 at the Cleveland Clinic Cole Eye Institute. Data collected included examination findings, adverse events, device usage, impact on quality of life, and patient satisfaction. Results: The average age of patients at implantation was 71 years, with 84.6% being male. All patients had severe visual impairment prior to surgery. Four patients experienced serious adverse events, including conjunctival erosion, vitreous hemorrhage, persistent corneal abrasion, and vertigo. None of the 10 patients who had recent follow-up appointments were currently using the device, with an average ± SD usage duration of 3.34 ± 2.65 years. Discontinuation reasons included performance issues, cognitive load, and physical discomfort, among others. Five patients reported that with the knowledge they currently have, they would choose to receive the implant again. Conclusions: Argus II provided potential benefits but also presented significant challenges related to device performance, cognitive demands, and long-term support. The cessation of commercial operations by the manufacturer and the resulting lack of support further complicated the experiences of patients. Despite this, the device remains a pioneering step in retinitis pigmentosa treatment, underscoring the need for ongoing innovation in visual prosthesis technology.