Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianas

Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: 2018
Autor(a) principal: Falabella, Paulo [UNIFESP]
Orientador(a): Não Informado pela instituição
Banca de defesa: Não Informado pela instituição
Tipo de documento: Tese
Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
dARK ID: ark:/48912/001300001wr2f
Idioma: por
Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
Programa de Pós-Graduação: Não Informado pela instituição
Departamento: Não Informado pela instituição
País: Não Informado pela instituição
Palavras-chave em Português:
Link de acesso: https://sucupira.capes.gov.br/sucupira/public/consultas/coleta/trabalhoConclusao/viewTrabalhoConclusao.jsf?popup=true&id_trabalho=6746825
https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/52902
Resumo: Objectives: To evaluate the safety profile and functionality of two implantable biomedical devices, bioelectronic retinal prostheses and nonbiodegradable implants seeded with retinal pigment epithelium cells derived from human embryonic stem cells (hESCRPE), as therapies for degenerative retinal diseases. Methods: 1. Longterm followup clinical study performed with patients implanted with Argus I (n=1) and Argus® II (n=30) prostheses, assessing the impact of chronic electrical stimulation on the retinal structure, visual function, functional vision, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), in 2 patients; 2. Preclinical study performed with nonbiodegradable implants inserted into the subretinal space of a retinal degeneration rat model, Royal College of Surgeons. Group 1 (n = 46) received implants without cells, group 2 (n = 59) received implants with hESCRPE, and the control group (n = 13) received no implants. Animals were evaluated by optokinetic reflex, superior colliculus (SC) electrophysiology and histological analysis 21 weeks after surgery; 3. Preclinical study performed with implants inserted into the subretinal space of healthy Yucatan minipigs, immunosuppressed systemically and/or intravitreally. Group 1 (n=11) received implants with hESCRPE cells while the control group (n=3) received sham surgery. Animals were evaluated 1 month after implantation via histological and immunohistochemistry analyses and imaging assessment. Results: 1. Argus I and Argus® II demonstrated functionality and a favorable safety profile after chronic electrical stimulation of 10 (n=1) and 3 years (n=30), respectively. Acquisition of structural and functional data was achieved via fMRI scans with an inactive Argus® II implant, showing artifacts around the patient’s implanted eye. The correlation between the functional responses in the primary visual cortex and the primary somatosensory cortex was reduced after prolonged use with the Argus II; 2. Group 2 demonstrated survival of hESCRPE in 87% of cases, and a higher number of responsive SC sites. A significant number of host outer retinal cells was rescued in groups 1 and 2, associated with an improvement in the optokinetic reflex test; 3. The implants appeared to be stable in the subretinal space in 91% of cases as shown by optical coherence tomography, without evidence of rupture or migration of the substrate. Histological analysis demonstrated intraretinal localization of the implant in 1020% of cases, whereas immunohistochemistry indicated survival of hESCRPE cells on the implant without cell migration or tumor formation. Conclusions: 1. The anatomical and functional results after chronic electrical stimulation with Argus I and Argus® II support the safety and feasibility of retinal prostheses as a longterm treatment for some types of blindness. Successful acquisition and quantification of structural and functional images with fMRI are feasible in the presence of an inactive Argus® II, despite of localized artifacts. Preliminary data suggests that functional changes in the brain may follow sight restoration treatments; 2. Preclinical results suggest that implants seeded with hESCRPE may be considered suitable as a treatment strategy to address the degeneration of outer retinal cells; 3. The safety profile of the surgical technique used to introduce the implant in a large animal model provides an encouraging starting point for human studies.
id UFSP_b704939b56abf504a31dbff02448ff7f
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/52902
network_acronym_str UFSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
repository_id_str
spelling Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianasImplantable biomedical devices as therapies for retinal dystrophies and degenerative retinal diseasesRetinal pigment epitheliumImplantable biomedical devicesHuman embryonic stem cellsPróteses e implantesTransplante de célulasCélulastroncoDegeneração macularEpitélio pigmentado da retinaCirurgia vitreorretinianaObjectives: To evaluate the safety profile and functionality of two implantable biomedical devices, bioelectronic retinal prostheses and nonbiodegradable implants seeded with retinal pigment epithelium cells derived from human embryonic stem cells (hESCRPE), as therapies for degenerative retinal diseases. Methods: 1. Longterm followup clinical study performed with patients implanted with Argus I (n=1) and Argus® II (n=30) prostheses, assessing the impact of chronic electrical stimulation on the retinal structure, visual function, functional vision, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), in 2 patients; 2. Preclinical study performed with nonbiodegradable implants inserted into the subretinal space of a retinal degeneration rat model, Royal College of Surgeons. Group 1 (n = 46) received implants without cells, group 2 (n = 59) received implants with hESCRPE, and the control group (n = 13) received no implants. Animals were evaluated by optokinetic reflex, superior colliculus (SC) electrophysiology and histological analysis 21 weeks after surgery; 3. Preclinical study performed with implants inserted into the subretinal space of healthy Yucatan minipigs, immunosuppressed systemically and/or intravitreally. Group 1 (n=11) received implants with hESCRPE cells while the control group (n=3) received sham surgery. Animals were evaluated 1 month after implantation via histological and immunohistochemistry analyses and imaging assessment. Results: 1. Argus I and Argus® II demonstrated functionality and a favorable safety profile after chronic electrical stimulation of 10 (n=1) and 3 years (n=30), respectively. Acquisition of structural and functional data was achieved via fMRI scans with an inactive Argus® II implant, showing artifacts around the patient’s implanted eye. The correlation between the functional responses in the primary visual cortex and the primary somatosensory cortex was reduced after prolonged use with the Argus II; 2. Group 2 demonstrated survival of hESCRPE in 87% of cases, and a higher number of responsive SC sites. A significant number of host outer retinal cells was rescued in groups 1 and 2, associated with an improvement in the optokinetic reflex test; 3. The implants appeared to be stable in the subretinal space in 91% of cases as shown by optical coherence tomography, without evidence of rupture or migration of the substrate. Histological analysis demonstrated intraretinal localization of the implant in 1020% of cases, whereas immunohistochemistry indicated survival of hESCRPE cells on the implant without cell migration or tumor formation. Conclusions: 1. The anatomical and functional results after chronic electrical stimulation with Argus I and Argus® II support the safety and feasibility of retinal prostheses as a longterm treatment for some types of blindness. Successful acquisition and quantification of structural and functional images with fMRI are feasible in the presence of an inactive Argus® II, despite of localized artifacts. Preliminary data suggests that functional changes in the brain may follow sight restoration treatments; 2. Preclinical results suggest that implants seeded with hESCRPE may be considered suitable as a treatment strategy to address the degeneration of outer retinal cells; 3. The safety profile of the surgical technique used to introduce the implant in a large animal model provides an encouraging starting point for human studies.Objetivos: Avaliar o perfil de segurança e funcionalidade de dois dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis, próteses retinianas bioeletrônicas e implantes nãobiodegradáveis semeados com células do epitélio pigmentar retiniano derivadas de célulastronco (hESCRPE), como formas de tratamento para doenças retinianas degenerativas. Métodos: 1A. Acompanhamento clínico de longo prazo de 1 paciente implantado com a prótese Argus I e 30 pacientes implantados com a prótese Argus® II, analisando os efeitos da estimulação elétrica crônica sobre a retina, testes de função visual, visão funcional, e 1B. captação de imagens por ressonância magnética funcional (fMRI) em 2 pacientes implantados; 2. Estudo préclínico com implantes nãobiodegradáveis inseridos no espaço subretiniano de ratos degenerados Royal College of Surgeons. O grupo 1 (n=46) recebeu implantes sem células, o grupo 2 (n=59) recebeu implantes com hESCRPE, e o grupo 3 (n=13) serviu de grupo controle. Os animais foram submetidos a teste comportamental optocinético, avaliação eletrofisiológica cerebral (colículo superior) e análise histológica após 21 semanas de cirurgia; 3. Estudo préclinico com implantes inseridos no espaço subretiniano de porcos sem degeneração, Yucatan minipigs, imunossuprimidos de forma sistêmica e/ou intravítrea. O grupo intervenção (n=11) recebeu implantes com hESCRPE, e o grupo controle (n=3) foi submetido a cirurgia incompleta sem implante. Os animais foram avaliados após 1 mês de implantação, com análise histológica, imunohistoquímica e exame oftalmológico por imagens. Resultados: 1A. As próteses Argus I e Argus® II demonstraram funcionalidade e perfil de segurança favorável após uso crônico por 10 (n=1) e 3 anos (n=30), respectivamente. 1B. O Argus® II inativo permitiu a aquisição de imagens por fMRI, com artefatos localizados no córtex orbitofrontal adjacente ao implante em 2 pacientes. A correlação entre as respostas funcionais no córtex visual e somatossensorial mostrouse alterada após uso prolongado da prótese; 2. O grupo 2 demonstrou sobrevivência das células em 87% dos casos e um número maior de regiões responsivas ao exame eletrofisiológico do colículo superior. Um número significativo de células retinianas externas do hospedeiro foi resgatado nos grupos 1 e 2, associados a uma melhora no teste optocinético; 3. Os implantes demonstraram estabilidade anatômica no espaço subretiniano à tomografia de coerência óptica em 91% dos casos, sem ruptura ou migração do substrato. A análise histológica demonstrou localização intrarretiniana do implante em 1020% dos casos, enquanto que a avaliação imunohistoquímica indicou sobrevivência das células hESCRPE sobre o implante, sem dispersão celular ou formação de tumores intra ou extraoculares. Conclusões: 1A. Os resultados anatômicos e funcionais após estimulação crônica com o Argus I e Argus® II corroboram a tese da segurança e da viabilidade do seu uso como tratamento de longo prazo para alguns tipos de cegueira. 1B. A aquisição de imagens por fMRI se mostrou possível com o Argus® II desativado, apesar dos artefatos adjacentes ao implante. Dados preliminares sugerem que mudanças funcionais cerebrais podem decorrer do reestabelecimento visual promovido pelas próteses bioeletrônicas; 2. Os resultados préclínicos sugerem que os implantes semeados com hESCRPE podem ser considerados uma estratégia adequada de tratamento para doenças degenerativas das camadas retinianas externas. 3. A técnica cirúrgica de implantação em modelo animal de grande porte demonstrou um perfil de segurança encorajador para o uso em pesquisas clínicas.Dados abertos - Sucupira - Teses e dissertações (2018)Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Schor, Paulo [UNIFESP]http://lattes.cnpq.br/3542867700396961http://lattes.cnpq.br/1649292905027255Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Falabella, Paulo [UNIFESP]2020-03-25T12:10:40Z2020-03-25T12:10:40Z2018-07-26info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion188 f.application/pdfhttps://sucupira.capes.gov.br/sucupira/public/consultas/coleta/trabalhoConclusao/viewTrabalhoConclusao.jsf?popup=true&id_trabalho=67468252018-0846.pdfhttps://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/52902ark:/48912/001300001wr2fporSão Pauloinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2024-08-10T15:08:47Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/52902Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652024-08-10T15:08:47Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianas
Implantable biomedical devices as therapies for retinal dystrophies and degenerative retinal diseases
title Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianas
spellingShingle Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianas
Falabella, Paulo [UNIFESP]
Retinal pigment epithelium
Implantable biomedical devices
Human embryonic stem cells
Próteses e implantes
Transplante de células
Célulastronco
Degeneração macular
Epitélio pigmentado da retina
Cirurgia vitreorretiniana
title_short Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianas
title_full Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianas
title_fullStr Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianas
title_full_unstemmed Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianas
title_sort Dispositivos biotecnológicos implantáveis como terapias para doenças degenerativas retinianas
author Falabella, Paulo [UNIFESP]
author_facet Falabella, Paulo [UNIFESP]
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Schor, Paulo [UNIFESP]
http://lattes.cnpq.br/3542867700396961
http://lattes.cnpq.br/1649292905027255
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Falabella, Paulo [UNIFESP]
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Retinal pigment epithelium
Implantable biomedical devices
Human embryonic stem cells
Próteses e implantes
Transplante de células
Célulastronco
Degeneração macular
Epitélio pigmentado da retina
Cirurgia vitreorretiniana
topic Retinal pigment epithelium
Implantable biomedical devices
Human embryonic stem cells
Próteses e implantes
Transplante de células
Célulastronco
Degeneração macular
Epitélio pigmentado da retina
Cirurgia vitreorretiniana
description Objectives: To evaluate the safety profile and functionality of two implantable biomedical devices, bioelectronic retinal prostheses and nonbiodegradable implants seeded with retinal pigment epithelium cells derived from human embryonic stem cells (hESCRPE), as therapies for degenerative retinal diseases. Methods: 1. Longterm followup clinical study performed with patients implanted with Argus I (n=1) and Argus® II (n=30) prostheses, assessing the impact of chronic electrical stimulation on the retinal structure, visual function, functional vision, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), in 2 patients; 2. Preclinical study performed with nonbiodegradable implants inserted into the subretinal space of a retinal degeneration rat model, Royal College of Surgeons. Group 1 (n = 46) received implants without cells, group 2 (n = 59) received implants with hESCRPE, and the control group (n = 13) received no implants. Animals were evaluated by optokinetic reflex, superior colliculus (SC) electrophysiology and histological analysis 21 weeks after surgery; 3. Preclinical study performed with implants inserted into the subretinal space of healthy Yucatan minipigs, immunosuppressed systemically and/or intravitreally. Group 1 (n=11) received implants with hESCRPE cells while the control group (n=3) received sham surgery. Animals were evaluated 1 month after implantation via histological and immunohistochemistry analyses and imaging assessment. Results: 1. Argus I and Argus® II demonstrated functionality and a favorable safety profile after chronic electrical stimulation of 10 (n=1) and 3 years (n=30), respectively. Acquisition of structural and functional data was achieved via fMRI scans with an inactive Argus® II implant, showing artifacts around the patient’s implanted eye. The correlation between the functional responses in the primary visual cortex and the primary somatosensory cortex was reduced after prolonged use with the Argus II; 2. Group 2 demonstrated survival of hESCRPE in 87% of cases, and a higher number of responsive SC sites. A significant number of host outer retinal cells was rescued in groups 1 and 2, associated with an improvement in the optokinetic reflex test; 3. The implants appeared to be stable in the subretinal space in 91% of cases as shown by optical coherence tomography, without evidence of rupture or migration of the substrate. Histological analysis demonstrated intraretinal localization of the implant in 1020% of cases, whereas immunohistochemistry indicated survival of hESCRPE cells on the implant without cell migration or tumor formation. Conclusions: 1. The anatomical and functional results after chronic electrical stimulation with Argus I and Argus® II support the safety and feasibility of retinal prostheses as a longterm treatment for some types of blindness. Successful acquisition and quantification of structural and functional images with fMRI are feasible in the presence of an inactive Argus® II, despite of localized artifacts. Preliminary data suggests that functional changes in the brain may follow sight restoration treatments; 2. Preclinical results suggest that implants seeded with hESCRPE may be considered suitable as a treatment strategy to address the degeneration of outer retinal cells; 3. The safety profile of the surgical technique used to introduce the implant in a large animal model provides an encouraging starting point for human studies.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-07-26
2020-03-25T12:10:40Z
2020-03-25T12:10:40Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format doctoralThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://sucupira.capes.gov.br/sucupira/public/consultas/coleta/trabalhoConclusao/viewTrabalhoConclusao.jsf?popup=true&id_trabalho=6746825
2018-0846.pdf
https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/52902
dc.identifier.dark.fl_str_mv ark:/48912/001300001wr2f
url https://sucupira.capes.gov.br/sucupira/public/consultas/coleta/trabalhoConclusao/viewTrabalhoConclusao.jsf?popup=true&id_trabalho=6746825
https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/52902
identifier_str_mv 2018-0846.pdf
ark:/48912/001300001wr2f
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 188 f.
application/pdf
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv São Paulo
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron:UNIFESP
instname_str Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron_str UNIFESP
institution UNIFESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br
_version_ 1848497943091347456