The Role of the Magnification Factor in the Recovery Process of Visual Field Defects After Retrogeniculate Lesions

  • B. Messing
  • H. Gänshirt
Conference paper

Abstract

In 1987 in a follow-up study we reported on visual field defects with vascular damage of the geniculostriate pathway. This study included 37 cases with infarctions or hematomas and homonymous field defects or cortical blindness. Investigations were carried out in the first week after the event, and repeated 6 months, 1 year and 3 years after the stroke.

Keywords

Migraine Peri Blindness 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baumgartner G (1977) Neuronal mechanisms of the migrainous visual aura. In: Rose CF (ed.) Physiological aspects of clinical neurology. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 111–121Google Scholar
  2. Bender MB, Kanzer MG (1939) Dynamics of homonymous hemianopias and preservation of central vision. Brain 62: 404–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Daniel PM, Whitebridge D (1961) The representation of the visual fields on the cerebral cortex in monkeys. J Physiol (Lond), 159: 203–221Google Scholar
  4. Koerner F, Teuber H-L (1973) Visual field defects after missile injuries to the geniculo-striate pathway in man. Exp Brain Res 18: 88–113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Messing B, Gänshirt H (1987a) Spontanverlauf vaskulärer, retrogenikulärer Gesichtsfeldstörungen. In: Poeck K, Hacke W, Schneider R (eds) Verhandlungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurologie. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 228–236Google Scholar
  6. Messing B, Gänshirt H (1987b) Follow-up of visual field defects with vascular damage of the geniculostriate visual pathway. Neuroophthalmology 7: 231–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Mountcastle VB (1978) An organizing principile for cerebral function: the unit module and the distribution system. In: Edelman GM, Mountcastle VB (eds) The mindful brain. MIT Press, Cambridge/MA, pp 7–50Google Scholar
  8. Poppelreuter L (1917) Die Störungen der niederen und höheren Sehleistungen durch Verletzung des Okzipitalhirns. Voss, Leipzig Die psychischen Schädigungen durch Kopfschuft im Kriege 1914–16 vol. 1Google Scholar
  9. Riddoch G (1917) Dissociation of visual preceptions due to occipital injuries, with special reference to appreciation of movement. Brain 40: 15–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Uhthoff L (1915) Beiträge zu den hemianopischen Gesichtsfeldstörungen nach Schädelschüssen, besonders solchen im Bereich des Hinterhauptes. Klin Mbl Augenheilkd 55: 104–125Google Scholar
  11. Zihl J, von Cramon D (1986) Recovery of visual field in patients with postgeniculate damage. In: Poeck K, Freund H-J, Gänshirt H (eds) Neurology. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg New York, pp 188–194Google Scholar
  12. Zihl J, von Cramon D, Brinkmann R, Backmund H (1977) Verlaufskontrolle und Prognose bei Gesichtsfeldausfällen von Patienten mit cerebrovaskulären Störungen. Nervenarzt 48: 219–224PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Messing
    • 1
  • H. Gänshirt
    • 1
  1. 1.Neurologische Universitätsklinik HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations