Abstract
My technical project and my STS research are connected through the broader goal of advancing retinal technology, but they look at that problem in different ways. My technical project is focused on building a better model of the retina by engineering a synthetic retinal cell membrane (Bruch’s membrane) scaffold for people with deteriorating vision. My STS research looks at why retinal technologies can still struggle even when the engineering itself works. Using Actor-Network Theory (ANT), I study the Argus II retinal prosthesis, a device designed to partially restore vision in people with severe retinal disease, and the network around it to understand why it never became a stable, routine treatment. Even though one project is more about lab design and the other is about what happens in the real world, both are asking what it actually takes for a retinal technology to succeed and help patients.
My technical project is about developing an electrospun Bruch’s membrane scaffold that can support native-like cell behavior in vitro. The main goal is to create a more physiologically accurate model for studying retinal diseases like age-related macular degeneration. A lot of current models do not fully recreate the structure and biochemical environment of native tissue. Our scaffolds try to improve this by using polyethylene fibers to guide how cells attach, organize, and function. By tuning certain biochemical factors, we hope to promote stronger cell junctions, better cell orientation, and more realistic secretion of growth factors. Overall, the goal of the design is to make preclinical retinal research more reliable and more useful for future therapies.
In my STS research paper, I argue that the Argus II retinal prosthesis became unstable not just because of technical limitations, but because the network around it started to fall apart. Using ANT, I look at how both human and non-human actors: patients, clinicians, insurers, rehabilitation systems, FDA approval, and company support, had to stay aligned for the device to work as a long-term treatment. Even though the Argus II showed real benefits in trials and got FDA approval, it still struggled because of high costs, difficult rehabilitation, and the loss of corporate support over time. Looking at the case this way shows that good engineering alone is not enough. Medical technology also depends on whether the larger support system around it can stay stable.
Working on both projects at the same time helped me think about retinal innovation in a broader way. My technical project made me focus on how to design something that better reflects biological reality, while my STS research made me realize that even a device that works can still fail if the support system around it is weak. I understood that it is not enough for something to work in controlled conditions if it cannot realistically be supported in the real world by a variety of stakeholders. Going forward, that is something I want to carry into future biomedical engineering work, especially for technologies that are meant to directly affect patients’ lives.
Word count: 498
