额叶变异性阿尔茨海默病:一个系统的叙事综合

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Andrea Brown , Sarah K. Salo , Greg Savage
{"title":"额叶变异性阿尔茨海默病:一个系统的叙事综合","authors":"Andrea Brown ,&nbsp;Sarah K. Salo ,&nbsp;Greg Savage","doi":"10.1016/j.cortex.2023.05.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Frontal variant Alzheimer's disease (fvAD) is considered a rare form of Alzheimer's disease (AD) which may be misdiagnosed as behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). The literature has tended to conflate behavioural and executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts and uses both AD diagnostic criteria and bvFTD diagnostic criteria to classify fvAD cohorts. The primary aim of this narrative synthesis was to summarise neuropsychological findings in fvAD cohorts in the context of established AD pathology.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>EMBASE, PsycINFO, PROQUEST and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies eligible for inclusion. Studies with both neuropsychological and biomarker evidence were included in the final narrative synthesis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Ten studies were reviewed, including samples totalling 342 fvAD participants, 178 typical AD participants and 250 bvFTD participants. The review revealed areas worthy of further investigation that may aid differential diagnosis, including the degree of executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts relative to bvFTD cohorts, the onset of behavioural and cognitive symptomatology, and similarities between fvAD and typical AD cognitive profiles.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There was insufficient neuropsychological evidence to clearly differentiate fvAD and bvFTD cognitive phenotypes, however, the review has highlighted distinctive features of the two disorders that may guide differential diagnosis in future research. Moreover, the review has highlighted issues involving disparate diagnostic criteria used to classify fvAD cohorts, contributing to variation in findings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10758,"journal":{"name":"Cortex","volume":"166 ","pages":"Pages 121-153"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Frontal variant Alzheimer's disease: A systematic narrative synthesis\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Brown ,&nbsp;Sarah K. Salo ,&nbsp;Greg Savage\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cortex.2023.05.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Frontal variant Alzheimer's disease (fvAD) is considered a rare form of Alzheimer's disease (AD) which may be misdiagnosed as behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). The literature has tended to conflate behavioural and executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts and uses both AD diagnostic criteria and bvFTD diagnostic criteria to classify fvAD cohorts. The primary aim of this narrative synthesis was to summarise neuropsychological findings in fvAD cohorts in the context of established AD pathology.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>EMBASE, PsycINFO, PROQUEST and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies eligible for inclusion. Studies with both neuropsychological and biomarker evidence were included in the final narrative synthesis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Ten studies were reviewed, including samples totalling 342 fvAD participants, 178 typical AD participants and 250 bvFTD participants. The review revealed areas worthy of further investigation that may aid differential diagnosis, including the degree of executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts relative to bvFTD cohorts, the onset of behavioural and cognitive symptomatology, and similarities between fvAD and typical AD cognitive profiles.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There was insufficient neuropsychological evidence to clearly differentiate fvAD and bvFTD cognitive phenotypes, however, the review has highlighted distinctive features of the two disorders that may guide differential diagnosis in future research. Moreover, the review has highlighted issues involving disparate diagnostic criteria used to classify fvAD cohorts, contributing to variation in findings.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cortex\",\"volume\":\"166 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 121-153\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cortex\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001094522300120X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cortex","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001094522300120X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

背景额叶变异性阿尔茨海默病(fvAD)被认为是阿尔茨海默病(AD)的一种罕见形式,可能被误诊为行为变异性额颞叶痴呆(bvFTD)。文献倾向于将fvAD队列中的行为功能障碍和执行功能障碍混为一谈,并使用AD诊断标准和bvFTD诊断标准对fvAD队列进行分类。这种叙述性综合的主要目的是在既定AD病理学的背景下总结fvAD队列的神经心理学发现。方法检索EMBASE、PsycINFO、PROQUEST和MEDLINE数据库中符合入选条件的研究。神经心理学和生物标志物证据的研究都包括在最后的叙述综合中。结果回顾了10项研究,包括342名fvAD参与者、178名典型AD参与者和250名bvFTD参与者的样本。该综述揭示了可能有助于鉴别诊断的值得进一步研究的领域,包括fvAD队列相对于bvFTD队列的执行功能障碍程度、行为和认知症状的发作,以及fvAD与典型AD认知特征之间的相似性。结论没有足够的神经心理学证据来明确区分fvAD和bvFTD认知表型,然而,这篇综述强调了这两种疾病的独特特征,这可能会在未来的研究中指导鉴别诊断。此外,该综述强调了涉及用于对fvAD队列进行分类的不同诊断标准的问题,这导致了研究结果的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Frontal variant Alzheimer's disease: A systematic narrative synthesis

Background

Frontal variant Alzheimer's disease (fvAD) is considered a rare form of Alzheimer's disease (AD) which may be misdiagnosed as behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). The literature has tended to conflate behavioural and executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts and uses both AD diagnostic criteria and bvFTD diagnostic criteria to classify fvAD cohorts. The primary aim of this narrative synthesis was to summarise neuropsychological findings in fvAD cohorts in the context of established AD pathology.

Methods

EMBASE, PsycINFO, PROQUEST and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies eligible for inclusion. Studies with both neuropsychological and biomarker evidence were included in the final narrative synthesis.

Results

Ten studies were reviewed, including samples totalling 342 fvAD participants, 178 typical AD participants and 250 bvFTD participants. The review revealed areas worthy of further investigation that may aid differential diagnosis, including the degree of executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts relative to bvFTD cohorts, the onset of behavioural and cognitive symptomatology, and similarities between fvAD and typical AD cognitive profiles.

Conclusion

There was insufficient neuropsychological evidence to clearly differentiate fvAD and bvFTD cognitive phenotypes, however, the review has highlighted distinctive features of the two disorders that may guide differential diagnosis in future research. Moreover, the review has highlighted issues involving disparate diagnostic criteria used to classify fvAD cohorts, contributing to variation in findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cortex
Cortex 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
250
审稿时长
74 days
期刊介绍: CORTEX is an international journal devoted to the study of cognition and of the relationship between the nervous system and mental processes, particularly as these are reflected in the behaviour of patients with acquired brain lesions, normal volunteers, children with typical and atypical development, and in the activation of brain regions and systems as recorded by functional neuroimaging techniques. It was founded in 1964 by Ennio De Renzi.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信