4.3 Article

Sustained extrastriate cortical activation without visual awareness revealed by fMRI studies of hemianopic patients

期刊

VISION RESEARCH
卷 41, 期 10-11, 页码 1459-1474

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00069-4

关键词

cortical blindness; blindsight; hemianopia; visual cortical areas; visual awareness; fMRI; lesion

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Patients with lesions in the primary visual cortex (V1) may show processing of visual stimuli presented in their field of cortical blindness even when they report being unaware of the stimuli. To elucidate the neuroanatomical basis of their residual visual functions, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging in two hemianopic patients, FS and CY. In the first experiment, a rotating spiral stimulus was used to assess the responsiveness of dorsal stream areas. Although no response was detectable within denervated or destroyed early visual cortex, motion-sensitive areas (hMT + /V5) ipsilateral to the lesion showed a strong sustained hemodynamic response. In GY, this activation was at least as strong as that of his contralesional hMT + /V5 to the stimulus in the normal hemifield. In the second experiment, coloured images of natural objects were used to assess the responsiveness of ventral stream areas. Again, no activity was detectable in ipsilesional early visual areas, but extrastriate areas in the lateral occipital cortex (hMT + /V5 and LO) and within the posterior fusiform gyrus (V4/V8) showed a robust sustained hemodynamic response. In both experiments, we observed that ipsilesional areas responded to stimuli presented in either hemifield, whereas the normal hemisphere responded preferentially to stimuli in the sighted hemifield. As only one subject occasionally noticed the onset of stimulation in the impaired field, the unexpectedly strong sustained activity in ipsilesional dorsal and ventral cortical areas appears to be insufficient to generate conscious vision. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据