Abstract
Stroke damage to the primary visual cortex (V1) causes severe visual deficits, which benefit from perceptual retraining. However, whereas training with high-contrast stimuli can locally restore orientation and direction discrimination abilities at trained locations, it only partially restores luminance contrast sensitivity (CS). Recent work revealed that high-contrast discrimination abilities may be preserved in the blind field of some patients early after stroke. Here, we asked if CS for orientation and direction discrimination is similarly preserved inside the blind field, to what extent, and whether it could benefit from a visual training intervention. Thirteen subacute (<3 months post-V1-stroke) and 12 chronic (>6 months post-V1-stroke) participants were pre-tested, then trained to discriminate either orientation or motion direction of Gabor patches of progressively lower contrasts. At baseline, more subacute than chronic participants could correctly discriminate the orientation of high-contrast Gabors in their blind field, but all failed to perform this task at lower contrasts, even when 10Hz flicker or motion direction were added. Training improved CS in a greater portion of subacute than chronic participants, but no-one attained normal CS, even when stimuli contained flicker or motion. We conclude that, unlike the near-complete training-induced restoration of high-contrast orientation and direction discrimination, there is limited capacity for restoring CS after V1 damage in adulthood. Our results suggest that CS involves different neural substrates and computations than those required for orientation and direction discrimination in V1-damaged visual systems.
Significance statement Stroke-induced V1 damage in adult humans induces a rapid and severe impairment of contrast sensitivity for orientation and direction discrimination in the affected hemifield, although discrimination of high-contrast stimuli can persist for months. Adaptive training with Gabor patches of progressively lower contrasts improves contrast sensitivity for these discriminations in the blind-field of both subacute (<3 months post-stroke) and chronic (>6 months post-stroke) participants, although it fails to restore fully-normal contrast sensitivity. Nonetheless, more subacute than chronic stroke participants benefit from such training, particularly when discriminating the orientation of static, non-flickering targets. Thus, contrast sensitivity appears critically dependent on processing within V1, with perceptual training displaying limited potential to fully restore it after V1 damage.
Competing Interest Statement
Krystel R. Huxlin, inventor on US Patent No. 7,549,743. All others: none.
Clinical Trial
NCT05098236
Funding Statement
This work was funded by NIH grants R01 EY027314, UL1 TR002001, T32 GM007356, TL1 TR002000, R21 EY031520 and an unrestricted grant to the Department of Ophthalmology at the University of Rochester from Research to Prevent Blindness.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Research Subjects Review Board of the University of Rochester gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos