These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Implantable miniature telescope for the treatment of visual acuity loss resulting from end-stage age-related macular degeneration: 1-year results.
    Author: Hudson HL, Lane SS, Heier JS, Stulting RD, Singerman L, Lichter PR, Sternberg P, Chang DF, IMT-002 Study Group.
    Journal: Ophthalmology; 2006 Nov; 113(11):1987-2001. PubMed ID: 16989902.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of an implantable visual prosthetic device (IMT; VisionCare Ophthalmic Technologies, Saratoga, CA) in patients with bilateral, end-stage age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN: Prospective, open-label, multicenter clinical trial with fellow eye controls. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 217 patients (mean age, 76 years) with AMD and moderate to profound bilateral central visual acuity loss (20/80-20/800) resulting from bilateral untreatable geographic atrophy, disciform scars, or both were enrolled. METHODS: A visual prosthetic device (implantable telescope), designed to enlarge retinal images of the central visual field, was implanted monocularly in the capsular bag after lens extraction. Fellow eyes were not implanted to provide peripheral vision and served as controls. Study patients participated in 6 visual rehabilitation visits after surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) and best-corrected near visual acuity (BCNVA), quality-of-life scores from the National Eye Institute 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) and the Activities of Daily Life scale, endothelial cell density (ECD), and incidence of complications and adverse events. RESULTS: At 1 year, 67% of implanted eyes achieved a 3-line or more improvement in BCDVA versus 13% of fellow eye controls (P<0.0001). Fifty-three percent of implanted eyes achieved a 3-line or more improvement in both BCDVA and BCNVA versus 10% of fellow eyes (P<0.0001). Mean BCDVA and BCNVA improved 3.5 lines and 3.2 lines, respectively, in implanted eyes versus 0.8 lines and 1.8 lines, respectively, in fellow eyes (P<0.0001). Change in visual acuity was not related to lesion type. Mean NEI VFQ-25 scores improved by more than 7 points from baseline (P<0.01) on 7 of 8 relevant subscales. Eleven eyes did not receive the device because of an aborted procedure. Endothelial cell density was reduced by 20% at 3 months and 25% at 1 year. The decrease in ECD was correlated with postsurgical edema (P<0.0001), and there was no evidence that endothelial cell loss is accelerated by ongoing endothelial trauma after implantation. CONCLUSIONS: This implantable visual prosthesis can improve visual acuity and quality of life in patients with moderate to profound visual impairment caused by bilateral, end-stage AMD.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]