John B. Martin

The development of a micro-shunt made from poly(styrene-block-isobutylene-block-styrene) to treat glaucoma

Abstract Glaucoma is the second leading cause of blindness with ∼70 million people worldwide who are blind from this disease. The currently practiced trabeculectomy surgery, the gold standard treatment used to stop the progression of vision loss, is rather draconian, traumatic to the patient and requires much surgical skill to perform. This article summarizes the more than 10‐year development path of a novel device called the InnFocus MicroShunt®, which is a minimally invasive glaucoma drainage micro‐tube used to shunt aqueous humor from the anterior chamber of the eye to a flap formed under the conjunctiva and Tenons Capsule. The safety and clinical performance of this device approaches that of trabeculectomy. The impetus to develop this device stemmed from the invention of a new biomaterial called poly(styrene‐block‐isobutylene‐block‐styrene), or “SIBS.” SIBS is ultra‐stable with virtually no foreign body reaction in the body, which manifests in the eye as clinically insignificant inflammation and capsule formation. The quest for an easier, safer, and more effective method of treating glaucoma led to the marriage of SIBS with this glaucoma drainage micro‐tube. This article summarizes the development of SIBS and the subsequent three iterations of design and four clinical trials that drove the one‐year qualified success rate of the device from 43% to 100%.

The use of poly(styrene-block-isobutylene-block-styrene) as a microshunt to treat glaucoma

The InnFocus MicroShunt® is a minimally invasive glaucoma drainage microtube used to shunt aqueous humor from the anterior chamber of the eye to a flap formed under the conjunctiva and Tenon’s capsule. The safety and clinical performance of this device approaches that of trabeculectomy with mitomycin C, the current ‘gold standard’ treatment for advanced glaucoma. The invention of a new biomaterial called poly(styrene-block-isobutylene-block-styrene) or ‘SIBS’ is the enabling factor which led to the success of this product. SIBS is ultrastable with virtually no foreign body reaction in the body, which manifests as clinically insignificant inflammation and capsule formation in the eye. The lack of capsule formation enables unobstructed flow through the 70 µm lumen tube and the achievement of controlled low intraocular pressure, which is important for the management of glaucoma. This article summarizes the integration of SIBS into a glaucoma drainage device and confirms its functionality with clinical success over a 2-year period.

Treatment of retinal detachment with an encircling band and buckle implant: A comparative pilot study between poly (styrene- b -isobutylene- b -styrene) (SIBS) and trimethyl terminated polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS)

Purpose: To demonstrate the biocompatibility of SIBS implants as compared to PDMS implants in the treatment of retinal detachment in New Zealand White (NZW) rabbit model.1,2 Introduction: Scleral encircling bands, fixation rings and buckles are utilized for closure of retinal breaks and retina reattachment. The FDA approved PDMS-implant is associated with several post-operative complications, involving thick-fibrotic encapsulations. SIBS, an elastomeric triblock copolymer, was recently FDA approved for use in a cardiovascular drug eluting stent (TAXUSTM, Boston Scientific Corp., MA) and showed excellent biocompatibility and slow drug release capability. Materials and Methods: SIBS (9-mol%-styrene) implants were fabricated (InnFocus LLC, USA) to match PDMS implants (Labtician, Inc, Canada) dimensions. 5 NZW rabbits received SIBS and 4, PDMS-implants. Post-operative exam sequence: day 1 and 2, week 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6, and monthly thereafter for up to 1 year. Anatomohistopathology exams sequence: one SIBS animal at 6 weeks and one animal of each treatment group at 3 and 6-months, and two at 12-months. Results: SIBS compared to PDMS animals exhibited less inflammation and a better buckling effect during the first 6 weeks. At POD 9 months, the conjunctival injection in the SIBS rabbit was none as opposed to the PDMS value and the buckling effect for both groups were equal. There were no visible signs of encapsulation with SIBS. There were no infections in the 9 animals and none of the implants extruded thus far (<10 months). Conclusion: SIBS encircling bands, sleeves, and buckle implants are well tolerated in the rabbit model.

A novel orbital tissue expander (OTE): design, in vitro, and in vivo studies

Purpose: To assess the efficacy of a novel orbital tissue expander (OTE) in treating congenital anophthalmic and microphthalmic infants. Methods: The OTE implant is an inflatable (0.5 to >6cc) silicone rubber globe sliding on a titanium T-shaped bone plate secured to the temporal bone with 1mm titanium screws. In vitro testing was performed to assess injection volume versus diameter measurements to determine consistency between devices, flex fatigue for durability of the implants when compressed, weight change in isotonic saline at 37°C to mimic human body temperature, seal durability by puncturing the globe numerous times while inflating, capacity before rupture to determine the maximum amount of saline it is able to contain, and effective sterilization. Ex-vivo testing was performed for adjustments prior to in vivo study. An OTE was then implanted in five 2-week old kittens (OS only) and inflated in 0.5cc increments. Three control animals received enucleation alone. All 8 animals were followed for 18 weeks and underwent euthanasia for morphological and histopathological analysis. Results: In vitro testing confirmed a <5% diameter variance between different OTEs inflated in 0.5cc increments up to 5.0cc, <5% weight change in isotonic saline at 37°C over 7 weeks, <3% weight change over 14 months in the fatigue tester, and no quantifiable leakage (<1mg) after 65 consecutive 30ga needle punctures. The OTEs were successfully sterilized by autoclave and easily secured in the orbit of postmortem kittens. The in vivo study demonstrated biocompatibility of the implant which stimulates orbital bone growth resulting in almost no difference between the implanted socket and the control eye of the cat. There were no adverse effects in the normal maturation, weight gain, and food intake of the cats. Light microscopy showed no signs of foreign body reaction. Pictures of the implants were obtained by using a shadow-photogrammetry system to compare the explanted OTE with the OD control eye. Conclusion: In vitro and in vivo studies show the implants potential to safely treat anophthalmic and microphthalmic infants.