Recovery of visual field defect without steriods

[santana8]

I wonder if any of you have had a visual field defect? I have had one for two years now. I am not sure, and niether are my doctors, but I suspect that I had Retoubular neuritis. Because it took them six months to figure out that I really couldn't see right, I didn't get steriods or any treatment. After they found the visual field defect on testing, it was too late for the steriods to do any good. I have had to recover my vision without any treatment. IT has recovered slowly over the last two years but is still not normal. It seems to me that the field cut, which is a inferior(bottom) harmoneous( in both vision fields) quadrant (1/4 of the field) visual field defect, is shrinking. And as it gets smaller I am getting some of the field back around the scatoma. The good thing about not having steriod treatment is that I probally have less of a chance of having a steriod withdrawl recurrence. The bad thing is that this thing has lasted for two years. I haven't been able to drive for this whole time. I miss taking my three boys out to do things, but I am trying to hang in there. If I were guessing how much of an improvement I have seen since the onset on a 100% scale, then I would have to say about 70%.The things that I have seen is beyond belief. It seems to change more toward normal in intrivals of about every two weeks. It has had this recovery pattern since the beginning. I only go to the store about once a week. This is when I am able to see the improvement because this is the only invironment I see except for my home which I have made visually comfortable for myself as much as possible. I know that it is not good for me to stay home so much, but the world has not looked familar to me for so long now that it  scares me even now to deal with the distortions. My neuro and opthalmologist say that the damage is all in the brain as my eyes are perfecly healthy and my visual acuity is 20/20. I asked my neuro if visual field defects could get better. He said they could, but how much depends on how completely my brain remylelinnates. I am still seeing improvement two years later, so I am thinking it is still getting better. I have accepted the fact that it may never be normal again and some of this could be perminant, but I still can hope! My question is how much vision recovered for those of you who have had ON and were given steriods or some other treatment?  Does anyone know of anyone who has had to recover without treatment and what the results were? Does my neuro's decission not to treat with steriods after the acute phase had passed sound right? I have read that with steriods the vision usually returns to near normal with six months. Thats a lot less than two years. IT wasn't my neuro's fault that I didn't get the steriods in the acute phase as he was my second opinion. What are your thoughts on this?

[santana8]

Sorry about the long question and no spaces, sometimes its hard for me to find the point

that I'm trying to make. The only other questions were  that it seems that the stacoma is

shrinking, and as it does I am able to see more of the field around it. Is this what is

happening?

If it does  come completely back do you think it will keep doing it so gradually that it will

slip back toward normal without me realizing it. This is how it seems to be doing so far.

And the last question is does this sound like my brain is remylenating where the lesions

are at?

[Quixotic1]

Hi, I'm going to give you an answer without completely reading your question.  Sorry, I just couldn't get all the way through it.  The reason is that it is just too hard to read that much info in a single paragraph.  If you could break up your thoughts into smaller paragraphs and double space between the para's, it would help those of us who have trouble with eye-tracking.  Thanks.  I don't mean to be stern here.

The question is partly whether your visual outcome is affected by receiving or NOT receiving steroids.  It is not affected.

There was a long term, large-scale study that looked at this. It showed clearly that ultimate resolution of ON is not changed by getting steroids or not getting steroids.  The only thing the steroid do is help the symptoms resolve faster.  You don't suffer the pain as long.  But, the effect on your vision is not changed.  I just read two new articles on this.  And they were in agreement with all the other that I have read.

From this study many people also concluded that treatment with oral steroids seemed to cause "more episodes" of ON, but did not have any affect on the ultimate outcome of vision loss.  That was not conclusive, but was suggested by the findings.

I agree with you.  Most of the regular articles I have read reassures us that most episodes of ON will resolve completely by 6 months or so.  But, we do hear from a lot of people that have had lingering visual problems.

If I missed something, let me know.

Quix