Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The British Journal of Ophthalmology logoLink to The British Journal of Ophthalmology
. 1981 Jun;65(6):429–435. doi: 10.1136/bjo.65.6.429

Macular sparing investigated by means of Haidinger brushes.

M T Perenin, E Vadot
PMCID: PMC1039539  PMID: 7260015

Abstract

Haidinger brushes, an entoptic phenomenon perceived only through the most central macular retina, have been used in addition to kinetic and static perimetry with the Tubingen perimeter for determining macular sparing and splitting in hemianopic patients. Seven patients were examined: 2 with a bitemporal hemianopia resulting from traumatic damage to the optic chiasma, and 5 with a homonymous hemianopia resulting from extensive lesions of the optic radiations and/or the occipital cortex (including 2 cases of hemidecortication). On perimetric examination some exceptions could be observed in the correspondence of macular splitting and sparing respectively with pre- and postgeniculate lesions, but this was not the case when Haidinger brushes were used. Half of the figure was then perceived by the patients with lesions of the chiasma and the entire figure by all the patients with geniculostriate lesions. We consider that results obtained by this simple method are more reliable than those obtained by perimetry and that Haidinger brushes should be used for macular field examination in neuro-ophthalmic practice.

Full text

PDF
429

Images in this article

431Image
on p.431

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bunt A. H., Minckler D. S., Johanson G. W. Demonstration of bilateral projection of the central retina of the monkey with horseradish peroxidase neuronography. J Comp Neurol. 1977 Feb 15;171(4):619–630. doi: 10.1002/cne.901710412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Colenbrander M. C. Sparing of the macula. Ophthalmologica. 1975;171(1):91–94. doi: 10.1159/000307451. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cowey A., Perry V. H. The projection of the fovea to the superior colliculus in rhesus monkeys. Neuroscience. 1980;5(1):53–61. doi: 10.1016/0306-4522(80)90070-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Fisher N. F., Jampolsky A., Scott A. B. Traumatic bitemporal hemianopsia. I. Diagnosis of macular splitting. Am J Ophthalmol. 1968 Feb;65(2):237–242. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(68)93594-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Harvey L. O., Jr Single representation of the visual midline in humans. Neuropsychologia. 1978;16(5):601–610. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(78)90088-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Haun F. Functional dissociation of the hemispheres using foveal visual input. Neuropsychologia. 1978;16(6):725–733. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(78)90007-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hochheimer B. F. Polarized light retinal photography of a monkey eye. Vision Res. 1978;18(1):19–23. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(78)90071-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Koerner F., Teuber H. L. Visual field defects after missile injuries to the geniculo-striate pathway in man. Exp Brain Res. 1973 Aug 31;18(1):88–113. doi: 10.1007/BF00236558. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Perenin M. T., Jeannerod M. Visual function within the hemianopic field following early cerebral hemidecortication in man--I. Spatial localization. Neuropsychologia. 1978;16(1):1–13. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(78)90037-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Perenin M. T. Visual function within the hemianopic field following early cerebral hemidecortication in man--II. Pattern discrimination. Neuropsychologia. 1978;16(6):697–708. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(78)90004-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. SPALDING J. M. K. Wounds of the visual pathway. Part II. The striate cortex. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1952 Aug;15(3):169–183. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.15.3.169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Sloan L. L. The Tubinger perimeter of Harms and Aulhorn. Recommended procedures and supplementary equipment. Arch Ophthalmol. 1971 Dec;86(6):612–622. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1971.01000010614002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Stone J., Leicester J., Sherman S. M. The naso-temporal division of the monkey's retina. J Comp Neurol. 1973 Aug;150(3):333–348. doi: 10.1002/cne.901500306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Torjussen T. Visual processing in cortically blind hemifields. Neuropsychologia. 1978;16(1):15–21. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(78)90038-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Vadot E., Perenin M. T. L'épargne maculaire dans les hémianopsies latérales homonymes d'origine occipitale: étude au moyen des houppes de Haidinger. Bull Soc Ophtalmol Fr. 1979 Jun-Jul;79(6-7):653–656. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. WILLIAMS D., GASSEL M. M. Visual function in patients with homonymous hemianopia. I. The visual fields. Brain. 1962 Jun;85:175–250. doi: 10.1093/brain/85.2.175. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Wyatt H. J. Nasotemporal overlap and visual field sparing. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1978 Nov;17(11):1128–1130. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The British Journal of Ophthalmology are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES