Literature DB >> 20678761

Line bisection in homonymous visual field defects - Recent findings and future directions.

Georg Kerkhoff1, Thomas Schenk.   

Abstract

Homonymous visual field defects are a frequent consequence of brain damage occurring in some 20-40% of stroke patients. They are often accompanied by a peculiar spatial bias termed "Hemianopic Line Bisection Error" (HLBE). Although known for more than 100 years the explanations for the HLBE put forward remain controversial. One explanation holds that the HLBE is a direct consequence of the field defect itself and reflects a compensatory shift of attention towards the scotoma. Another, contradicting position states that although the HLBE is frequently found in any type of homonymous visual field defect - not only hemianopia - it is not simply a direct consequence of the field defect itself, although it does contribute to it. According to this position, the HLBE arises from additional damage to extrastriate cortex, thus causing the spatial bias towards the blind field. In the present article we summarize the main arguments of both theoretical positions and argue that although both accounts are valid, they are incomplete and several important issues remain unresolved. These include the potential contribution of eccentric fixation to the HLBE, the question of multimodal impairments, the role of (visuo)-motor processes, the relation between the HLBE and visual field recovery, and the exact clinical significance of the HLBE. Thus, far from concluding the research on the line-bisection error in hemianopia, the recent series of publications on this topic serve as a welcome reminder of how much more research is needed.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Srl. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20678761     DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2010.06.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cortex        ISSN: 0010-9452            Impact factor:   4.027


  8 in total

1.  Spatial distortions in localization and midline estimation in hemianopia and normal vision.

Authors:  Francesca C Fortenbaugh; Thomas M VanVleet; Michael A Silver; Lynn C Robertson
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Hemianopic line bisection error in a patient with Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Heeyoung Kang; Soo-Kyoung Kim; Ki-Jong Park; Nack-Cheon Choi; Oh-Young Kwon; Byeong Hoon Lim
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 3.307

3.  Evidence of top-down modulation of the Brentano illusion but not of the glare effect by transcranial direct current stimulation.

Authors:  Ottavia Maddaluno; Alessio Facchin; Daniele Zavagno; Nadia Bolognini; Elisa Gianoli; Elisa M Curreri; Roberta Daini
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-06-12       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 4.  Driving with homonymous visual field loss: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Alex R Bowers
Journal:  Clin Exp Optom       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 2.742

5.  Which Differences in Priming Effect Between Neglect and Hemianopia? A Case Description of a Bilateral Brain-Lesioned Patient.

Authors:  Matteo Sozzi; Stefania Bianchi Marzoli; Lisa Melzi; Massimo Corbo; Irene Venturella; Michela Balconi
Journal:  Neuroophthalmology       Date:  2017-05-19

6.  The Effects of Hemianopia on Perception of Mutual Gaze.

Authors:  Alex R Bowers; Sarah Sheldon; Heiko Hecht
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.973

7.  A rightward shift in the visuospatial attention vector with healthy aging.

Authors:  Christopher S Y Benwell; Gregor Thut; Ashley Grant; Monika Harvey
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 5.750

8.  Influence of hemianopic visual field loss on visual motor control.

Authors:  Diederick C Niehorster; Eli Peli; Andrew Haun; Li Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.