Cited by 231Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and Memory

Differential cognitive effects of colloid cysts in the third ventricle that spare or compromise the fornix

Aggleton, J. P.·2000·Brain

Abstract

A series of twelve cases, all of whom had received surgery for the removal of a colloid cyst in the third ventricle, was examined on a series of memory tests. The only consistent predictor of poor memory performance that could be detected from MRIs was the presence of bilateral interruption of the fornix, which occurred in three of the subjects. Although these three cases were poor on tests of learning and recall, there was evidence that recognition was less impaired. The subjects were also tested on a set of recognition and concurrent discriminations that closely matched tests given to non-human primates. Clear parallels were found between the apparent effects of fornix damage in these clinical cases and those observed following more selective surgery in non-human primates. These findings not only indicate that fornix damage is sufficient to induce anterograde amnesia but also support the validity of recent animal tests that are thought to capture aspects of episodic memory.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/brain/123.4.800

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Damage to the fornix, as well as the anterior thalamus, causes anterograde amnesia in humans.

    “Furthermore, damage to the fornix, as well as the anterior thalamus, causes anterograde amnesia in humans (Aggleton and Brown, 1999; Aggleton et al., 2000; Carlesimo et al., 2011; Gaffan and Gaffan, 1991).”

    From The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction (2018) · cites this paper as Aggleton et al., 2000

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aggleton, J. P.
Affiliations
Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Aggleton, J. P.
Venue
Brain
Published
2000-04-01
Volume
123
Issue
4
Pages
800-815
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2140405850
Cited by
231
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
colloid cyst, third ventricle, anterograde amnesia, episodic memory, recognition memory, memory impairment, fornix lesions, nonhuman primate model
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Diseases, Cerebral Ventricles, Cognition, Cysts, Discrimination, Psychological, Efferent Pathways, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Photic Stimulation, Psychometrics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review