Line bisection in simulated homonymous hemianopia

Hemianopic patients make a systematic error in line bisection, showing a contra-lesional bias towards their blind side, which is the opposite of that in hemineglect patients. This error has been attributed variously to the visual field defect, to long-term strategic adaptation, or to independent effects of damage to extrastriate cortex. To determine if hemianopic bisection error can occur without the latter two factors, we studied line bisection in healthy subjects with simulated homonymous hemianopia using a gaze-contingent display, with different line-lengths, and with or without markers at both ends of the lines. Simulated homonymous hemianopia did induce a contra-lesional bisection error and this was associated with increased fixations towards the blind field. This error was found with end-marked lines and was greater with very long lines. In a second experiment we showed that eccentric fixation alone produces a similar bisection error and eliminates the effect of line-end markers. We conclude that a homonymous hemianopic field defect alone is sufficient to induce both a contra-lesional line bisection error and previously described alterations in fixation distribution, and does not require long-term adaptation or extrastriate damage.

About the role of visual field defects in pure alexia

Pure alexia is an acquired reading disorder characterized by a disproportionate prolongation of reading time as a function of word length. Although the vast majority of cases reported in the literature show a right-sided visual defect, little is known about the contribution of this low-level visual impairment to their reading difficulties. The present study was aimed at investigating this issue by comparing eye movement patterns during text reading in six patients with pure alexia with those of six patients with hemianopic dyslexia showing similar right-sided visual field defects. We found that the role of the field defect in the reading difficulties of pure alexics was highly deficit-specific. While the amplitude of rightward saccades during text reading seems largely determined by the restricted visual field, other visuo-motor impairments-particularly the pronounced increases in fixation frequency and viewing time as a function of word length-may have little to do with their visual field defect. In addition, subtracting the lesions of the hemianopic dyslexics from those found in pure alexics revealed the largest group differences in posterior parts of the left fusiform gyrus, occipito-temporal sulcus and inferior temporal gyrus. These regions included the coordinate assigned to the centre of the visual word form area in healthy adults, which provides further evidence for a relation between pure alexia and a damaged visual word form area. Finally, we propose a list of three criteria that may improve the differential diagnosis of pure alexia and allow appropriate therapy recommendations.

The influence of reading direction on hemianopic reading disorders.

Hemianopic reading impairment is a consequence of a visual field defect to either the right or the left side and is characterized by an increased reading time and reduced reading performance. Depending on the side of the visual field defect, reading will be affected differently: Patients suffering from a visual field defect to the right side have noticeable difficulties in reading fluently with slowing. Patients suffering from a visual field defect to the left usually struggle to find the beginning of a line and read more fluently. It was suggested in the literature that changing the reading direction from horizontal to vertical may be a training strategy to reduce reading problems in patients with hemianopia. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of reading direction on reading speed in patients with left- or right-sided visual field defects and in healthy controls. METHOD In 13 patients with hemianopia and in 13 age-matched controls, reading speed was calculated for texts in standard as well as in clockwise rotated orientation of 90, 180, and 270°. RESULTS In both groups, text rotation reduced reading speed compared to standard reading. Patients with left-sided hemianopia had the greatest reduction after text rotation. Patients with right-sided hemianopia had the smallest speed reduction in 90° vertically rotated texts. CONCLUSIONS Text rotation has different effects in left- or right-sided hemianopia patients. For patients with left-sided heminanopia, rotation of the text may not be a helpful training strategy, for right-sided hemianopia vertical rotation of the text of 90° may be a beneficial training strategy to reduce reading deficits.