ReviewContinuum (Minneapolis, Minn.)2014
Visual loss due to optic chiasm and retrochiasmal visual pathway lesions.
Review in Continuum (Minneapolis, Minn.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Network Analysis of Convergent and Specific Molecular Pathways of Nutraceuticals with Antioxidant and Neuroprotective Potential in Glaucoma.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Post-operative Outcomes of Pituitary Macroadenoma Patients in a Tertiary Hospital in the Philippines.Journal of the ASEAN Federation of Endocrine Societies · 2025Article
- Neuro-ophthalmic evaluation and management of pituitary disease.Eye (London, England) · 2024Review
- Review
- The case of a 75-year-old male with confusion and acute blindness.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2022Article
- Eye Signs in Stroke.Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology · 2022Article
- Eyes and stroke: the visual aspects of cerebrovascular disease.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewBuilding on the anatomic and diagnostic approaches presented elsewhere in this issue of CONTINUUM, this article presents important differential considerations for chiasmal and retrochiasmal vision loss, useful strategies for confirming the underlying etiology, principles of their natural history, and, where appropriate, treatment strategies. RECENT
findingsAlthough a wide variety of pathologic processes can affect the optic chiasm and retrochiasmal visual pathways, those commonly seen in neurologic practice are comparatively fewer in number. This article updates current understanding of vision loss localizing to the optic chiasm, including pituitary adenoma, sellar meningiomas, and aneurysms. Important causes of retrochiasmal vision loss, including stroke and posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome, are also presented. SUMMARY: The optic chiasm and retrochiasmal visual pathways are susceptible to various forms of injury, with resultant patterns of vision loss that can be precisely localized on the basis of clinical and neuroimaging findings. Accurate localization, in association with other clinical features, allows for consideration of relevant differential diagnoses, which can be confirmed through the judicious application of appropriate diagnostic studies. Accurate localization, diagnosis, and robust clinical surveillance are essential to the effective management and treatment of these causes of vision loss.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.