Does visual restitution training change absolute homonymous visual field defects? A fundus controlled study

Aim: To examine whether visual restitution training (VRT) is able to change absolute homonymous field defect, assessed with fundus controlled microperimetry, in patients with hemianopia. Methods: 17 patients with stable homonymous visual field defects before and after a 6 month VRT period were investigated with a specialised microperimetric method using a scanning laser ophthalmoscope (SLO). Fixation was controlled by SLO fundus monitoring. The size of the field defect was quantified by calculating the ratio of the number of absolute defects and the number of test points; the training effect E was defined as the difference between these two ratios before and after training. A shift of the entire vertical visual field border by 1° would result in an E value of 0.14. Results: The mean training effect of all right eyes was E = 0.025 (SD 0.052) and all left eyes E = 0.008 (SD 0.034). In one eye, a slight non-homonymous improvement along the horizontal meridian occurred. Conclusions: In one patient, a slight improvement along the horizontal meridian was found in one eye. In none of the patients was an explicit homonymous change of the absolute field defect border observed after training.

[1]  J Zihl,et al.  Restitution of visual function in patients with cerebral blindness. , 1979, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[2]  B. Sabel,et al.  Restoration of vision by training of residual functions , 2000, Current opinion in ophthalmology.

[3]  S. Trauzettel-Klosinski,et al.  Nasotemporal overlap of retinal ganglion cells in humans: a functional study. , 2003, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[4]  B. Sabel,et al.  Stability of Visual Field Enlargements Following Computer-Based Restitution Training Results of a Follow-up , 2001, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[5]  A. Huber,et al.  Macular sparing as a perimetric artifact. , 1995, American journal of ophthalmology.

[6]  S. Trauzettel-Klosinski Eccentric fixation with hemianopic field defects: A valuable strategy to improve reading ability and an indication of cortical plasticity , 1997 .

[7]  A. Huber Zur Rehabilitation der homonymen Hemianopsie1 2 , 2000 .

[8]  J. Zihl,et al.  Visual scanning behavior in patients with homonymous hemianopia , 1995, Neuropsychologia.

[9]  R. Yee,et al.  The vertical field border in hemianopia and its significance for fixation and reading. , 1998, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[10]  B. Sabel,et al.  Residual vision in transition zones in patients with cerebral blindness. , 1998, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[11]  J Zihl,et al.  Visual field rehabilitation in the cortically blind? , 1986, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[12]  S. Trauzettel-Klosinski,et al.  Eye movements in reading with hemianopic field defects: the significance of clinical parameters , 1998, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[13]  G. Nelles,et al.  Compensatory visual field training for patients with hemianopia after stroke , 2001, Neuroscience Letters.

[14]  Bernhard A. Sabel,et al.  Computer-based training for the treatment of partial blindness , 1998, Nature Medicine.