PEARL
Dorsal simultanagnosia is a sign of biparietal cortical pathology. When found in combination with a hypokinetic-rigid syndrome, corticobasal degeneration should be considered.
OY-STERS
Patients will often not complain of subtle visual processing deficits. If neuropsychological testing is not performed, these deficits will go unnoticed.
Confrontation naming can be impaired for different reasons: the presence of nonfluent aphasia in this patient cannot explain the partonomic errors.
We report a 77-year-old patient with visual agnosia as a cortical sign of neurodegenerative disease.
The patient presented with balance problems and frequent falls since age 72 and subsequent nonfluent aphasia. Clinical examination revealed a supranuclear vertical gaze palsy and a symmetrical hypokinetic-rigid syndrome. MRI of the cerebrum demonstrated enlargement of the left Sylvian fissure and bilateral intraparietal sulci as well as a hummingbird sign (figure 1, A–D). DaTscan showed bilateral reduced uptake (figure 1E). This clinical phenotype is suggestive of progressive supranuclear palsy.1
(A) Coronal MRI slice: asymmetric enlargement of the left Sylvian fissure (arrow). (B) Coronal MRI slices: enlargement of the bilateral intraparietal sulci (arrows). Note that the temporal cortex is relatively spared. (C) Axial MRI slice: enlargement of the bilateral intraparietal sulci (arrows). (D) Sagittal MRI slice: hummingbird sign. (E) DaTscan: bilateral reduced uptake.
Neuropsychological testing revealed executive dysfunction. The patient, whose vision was corrected to normal with glasses, scored 8/15 on an abbreviated version of the Boston Naming Test. He produced 2 partonomic errors: instead of a tree, he saw leaves, instead of a flower, he saw a branch. He called a hammock a bed, a camel a giraffe, a mask a clown. He could not identify a funnel and tongs. Naming errors due to nonfluent aphasia are typically phonetic errors. Partonomic errors during confrontation naming are visual in nature and indicate a deficit of recognition rather than of name retrieval. This is suggestive of visual agnosia.
When asked to copy the drawings of the Boston Naming Test, the patient omitted several salient surface features (figure 2). The inability of our patient to copy drawings suggests that he has dorsal simultanagnosia rather than ventral simultanagnosia. Both types of simultanagnosia lead to object identification deficits. In dorsal simultanagnosia, the naming errors occur because the patient does not perceive the picture in its entirety. Therefore, a patient with dorsal simultanagnosia will be impaired when asked to copy a drawing. In ventral simultanagnosia, the picture is perceived in its entirety, but it cannot be identified as a whole. This explains why a patient with ventral simultanagnosia can copy a drawing.2
Several visuoperceptual errors were documented when the patient copied the Boston Naming Test. The left column shows the probe picture, the right column shows the drawing made by the patient. Flower: placement error: no leaves are found on the left side. House: placement error of the top right window; salient features, e.g., chimneys, were not copied; the shape of the roof is inaccurate. Tongs: faulty perspective, inaccurately overlapping shapes. Whistle: faulty perspective, surface features are omitted.
Dorsal simultanagnosia is part of a Bálint syndrome, together with optic ataxia and ocular apraxia. Dorsal simultanagnosia can arise due to biparietal damage secondary to structural pathology or neurodegenerative disease, e.g., corticobasal degeneration, posterior cortical atrophy, or Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. In our patient, the working hypothesis is corticobasal degeneration.3 Given the initial clinical presentation suggestive of progressive supranuclear palsy, our patient adds to the growing phenotypic spectrum of tauopathies.4
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
B.B.: examination of the patient, revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. O.D.: examination of the patient, revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. R.B.: drafting of the manuscript, revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content.
STUDY FUNDING
No targeted funding reported.
DISCLOSURE
The authors report no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. Go to Neurology.org for full disclosures.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors thank Patrick Santens for comments on this case and Jan Casselman and Frank De Geeter for providing the MRI and DaTscan images.
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
- © 2016 American Academy of Neurology
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
