Kasten Erich, Bunzenthal Ulrike, Müller-Oehring Eva M, Mueller Iris, Sabel Bernhard A
Institute of Medical Psychology, Otto-von-Guericke University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2007 Aug;29(6):569-84. doi: 10.1080/13803390600878919.
Visual field deficits in patients have long been considered to be nontreatable, but in previous studies we have found an enlargement of the intact visual field following vision restoration therapy (VRT). In the present pilot study, we wished to determine whether a double-stimulation approach would facilitate visual field enlargements beyond those achieved by the single-stimulus paradigm used in standard VRT. This was motivated by the findings that following visual cortex injury in animals, the size of receptive fields could be enlarged by systematic costimulation, where two stimuli were used to excite visual cortex neurons (Eysel, Eyding, & Schweigart, 1998). Patients (n = 23) with stable homonymous field deficits after trauma, cerebral ischemia, or hemorrhage (lesion age > 6 months) carried out either (a) standard VRT with a single stimulation (n = 9), or vision therapy with (b) a parallel costimulation (n = 7) or (c) a moving costimulation paradigm (n = 7). Training was carried out twice daily for 30 min over a 3-month period. Before and after therapy, visual fields were tested with 30 degrees and 90 degrees Tübinger automatic perimetry (TAP) and with high-resolution perimetry (HRP). Eye movements were recorded with an eye tracking system. When data of all three types of visual field training were pooled, we found significant improvements of stimulus detection in HRP (4.2%) and fewer misses within the central 30 degrees perimetrically (-3.7% right eye, OD, or -4.4% left eye, OS). However, the type of training did not make any difference such that the three training groups profited equally. A more detailed analysis of trained versus untrained visual field areas in 16 patients revealed a superiority of the trained area of only 1.1% in HRP and between 3.5% (OS) and 4.4% (OD) in TAP. Spatial attention and alertness improved significantly in all three groups and correlated significantly with visual field enlargements. While vision training had no influence on the patient's testimonials concerning their visual abilities, the patients significantly improved in a practical paper-and-pencil number tracking task (Zahlen-Verbindungs Test; ZVT). Visual field enlargement does not benefit from a double-stimulation paradigm, but visual attention seems to play an important role in vision restoration. The improvements in trained as well as in untrained areas are explained by top-down attentional control mechanisms interacting with local visual cortex plasticity.
长期以来,患者的视野缺损一直被认为是无法治疗的,但在之前的研究中,我们发现视力恢复疗法(VRT)后完整视野会扩大。在本初步研究中,我们希望确定双刺激方法是否会比标准VRT中使用的单刺激范式更有助于扩大视野。这一想法的依据是,动物视觉皮层损伤后,通过系统的联合刺激(使用两种刺激来激发视觉皮层神经元),感受野的大小可以扩大(艾塞尔、艾丁和施魏加特,1998年)。23例因创伤、脑缺血或出血导致稳定的同向性视野缺损(损伤时间>6个月)的患者,分别进行了以下治疗:(a)单刺激标准VRT(n = 9),或视力治疗,包括(b)平行联合刺激(n = 7)或(c)移动联合刺激范式(n = 7)。在3个月的时间里,每天训练两次,每次30分钟。治疗前后,使用30度和90度的图宾根自动视野计(TAP)以及高分辨率视野计(HRP)对视野进行测试。使用眼动追踪系统记录眼动。当汇总所有三种视野训练类型的数据时,我们发现HRP中的刺激检测有显著改善(4.2%),在视野中央30度范围内漏检减少(右眼-3.7%,OD,或左眼-4.4%,OS)。然而,训练类型没有任何差异,三个训练组的获益相同。对16例患者中训练视野区域与未训练视野区域的更详细分析显示,HRP中训练区域仅占优势1.1%,TAP中占3.5%(OS)至4.4%(OD)。所有三组的空间注意力和警觉性均显著提高,且与视野扩大显著相关。虽然视力训练对患者关于其视觉能力的主观感受没有影响,但患者在实际的纸笔数字追踪任务(数字连接测试;ZVT)中显著改善。视野扩大并未从双刺激范式中获益,但视觉注意力似乎在视力恢复中起重要作用。训练区域和未训练区域的改善是由自上而下的注意力控制机制与局部视觉皮层可塑性相互作用来解释的。