Literature DB >> 2351972

Contralateral and ipsilateral disorders of visual attention in patients with unilateral brain damage.

G Gainotti1, L Giustolisi, U Nocentini.   

Abstract

To explain the prevalence of unilateral spatial neglect in patients with right brain damage, Heilman et al have suggested that the attentional neurons of the right parietal lobe might have bilateral receptive fields, whereas the homologous cells of the left hemisphere would have strictly contralateral receptive fields. One implication of this theory is that patients with right brain damage should show a prevalence of disorders of visual attention not only in the half space contralateral to the damaged hemisphere, but also in the ipsilateral one. To check this theory, 50 control subjects, 102 right and 125 left brain-damaged patients were given a drawing completion task in which patients were requested to complete the missing parts of a star, a cube and a house. Omissions of lines lying on the sides of the models contralateral and ipsilateral to the damaged hemisphere were taken separately into account. Results did not confirm the hypothesis, since right brain-damaged patients failed to complete the contralateral sides of the models much more frequently than patients with left brain injury, but no difference was found between the two hemispheric groups when ipsilateral disorders of visual attention were taken into account. Furthermore, no correlation was found between omissions of lines lying on the sides of the models contralateral and ipsilateral to the damaged hemisphere. This finding suggests that contralateral and ipsilateral disorders of visual attention are not due to the same mechanism in right brain-damaged patients. The alternative hypothesis viewing ipsilateral disorders as resulting from a widespread lowering of general attention (and only contralateral neglect reflecting a specific disorder of visual attention) was supported by results obtained on a verbal memory test, used to evaluate the general cognitive and attention level of the patients. Patients with clear-cut ipislateral inattention obtained very low scores on this test, whereas patients with severe contralateral neglect, but not ipislateral inattention scored within the normal range on the verbal memory test.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2351972      PMCID: PMC488060          DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.53.5.422

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry        ISSN: 0022-3050            Impact factor:   10.154


  8 in total

1.  Contralateral and ipsilateral tactile extinction in patients with right and left focal brain damage.

Authors:  G Gainotti; C De Bonis; A Daniele; C Caltagirone
Journal:  Int J Neurosci       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.292

2.  Hemispheric contribution to exploration of space through the visual and tactile modality.

Authors:  E De Renzi; P Faglioni; G Scotti
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  1970-06       Impact factor: 4.027

3.  Mechanisms underlying hemispatial neglect.

Authors:  K M Heilman; E Valenstein
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  1979-02       Impact factor: 10.422

4.  Right hemisphere dominance for attention: the mechanism underlying hemispheric asymmetries of inattention (neglect).

Authors:  K M Heilman; T Van Den Abell
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  1980-03       Impact factor: 9.910

5.  The occurrence of visual neglect in patients with unilateral cerebral disease.

Authors:  A Colombo; E De Renzi; P Faglioni
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  1976-09       Impact factor: 4.027

6.  Qualitative analysis of unilateral spatial neglect in relation to laterality of cerebral lesions.

Authors:  G Gainotti; P Messerli; R Tissot
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1972-08       Impact factor: 10.154

7.  Validity of some neuropsychological tests in the assessment of mental deterioration.

Authors:  C Caltagirone; G Gainotti; C Masullo; G Miceli
Journal:  Acta Psychiatr Scand       Date:  1979-07       Impact factor: 6.392

8.  Right cerebral dominance in spatial attention. Further evidence based on ipsilateral neglect.

Authors:  S Weintraub; M M Mesulam
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  1987-06
  8 in total
  4 in total

1.  Large-scale changes in network interactions as a physiological signature of spatial neglect.

Authors:  Antonello Baldassarre; Lenny Ramsey; Carl L Hacker; Alicia Callejas; Serguei V Astafiev; Nicholas V Metcalf; Kristi Zinn; Jennifer Rengachary; Abraham Z Snyder; Alex R Carter; Gordon L Shulman; Maurizio Corbetta
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2014-11-02       Impact factor: 13.501

2.  Different criteria in the assessment of visuospatial neglect.

Authors:  H Samuelsson; E Hjelmquist; H Naver; C Bromstrand
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 10.154

3.  Visuo-spatial neglect: qualitative differences and laterality of cerebral lesion.

Authors:  P W Halligan; J P Burn; J C Marshall; D T Wade
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 10.154

4.  Organization, maturation, and plasticity of multisensory integration: insights from computational modeling studies.

Authors:  Cristiano Cuppini; Elisa Magosso; Mauro Ursino
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-05-02
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.