My coauthors and I appreciate Dr. Rosenberg's comments on our article,1 and we agree in principle. The scope of the case report did not allow for the elaboration of the additional teaching points that Dr. Rosenberg elucidates, namely that there may be a contribution by the so-called peripheral nasal crescent, and that central sparing is typically very congruous. The visual field published is a copy of the exact visual field as it was obtained in the acute clinical setting.1 It depicts precisely what was extracted from the patient shortly after the original CNS insult by an experienced perimetrist. The patient was not cognitively entirely fit at the time due to the insult itself, which limits the precision of perimetry. However, it demonstrates the main principles offered as teaching points in the short communication. Regarding the comment pertaining to the notch, it is difficult to demonstrate such a finding even by experienced perimetrists, let alone in patients coming out of the intensive care unit.
from Neurology recent issues http://bit.ly/2XYrhW7
Comments
Post a Comment