Ondrej Machaczka, David Skoloudik, Jana Janoutova, Martin Roubec, Eva Reiterova, Martina Kovalova, Anna Zatloukalova, Petr Ambroz, Vladimir Janout
{"title":"神经心理学测试和预测痴呆与颈动脉狭窄程度的关系","authors":"Ondrej Machaczka, David Skoloudik, Jana Janoutova, Martin Roubec, Eva Reiterova, Martina Kovalova, Anna Zatloukalova, Petr Ambroz, Vladimir Janout","doi":"10.32725/jab.2022.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study constitutes a cross sectional analysis of the association between cognitive impairment defined by neuropsychological tests and carotid stenosis. The main objective was to compare the results of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) with regard to the degree of carotid stenosis. The sample comprised 744 patients who underwent a carotid duplex ultrasound and cognitive function testing (by ACE-R and MMSE). A multivariable analysis of potential confounding factors was completed. The significance of the different number of positive (MMSE ≤ 27, ACE-R ≤ 88) and negative (MMSE ≥ 28, ACE-R ≥ 89) results of the neuropsychological tests was analysed with regard to the degree of carotid stenosis (50-99%). Neuropsychological test results were also compared between carotid stenosis of 50-69%, 70-89%, and 90-99%. For both the MMSE and ACE-R, a difference was observed between positive and negative test results when higher degrees of stenosis were present. However, for the ACE-R only, more severe stenosis (80-89%, 90-99%) was predominantly associated with positive test results (p-value < 0.017). The same dependence for ACE-R (although not statistically significant) was observed in the group of patients without an ischemic stroke (confounding factor). In the case of the MMSE and more severe stenosis, negative results predominated, regardless of the confounding factor. There were no statistically significant differences in test results between carotid stenosis of 50-69%, 70-89%, and 90-99%. The results suggest that for assessing the early risk of cognitive impairment in patients with carotid atherosclerosis, the ACE-R appears more suitable than the MMSE.</p>","PeriodicalId":14912,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied biomedicine","volume":"20 4","pages":"115-123"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neuropsychological tests and prediction of dementia in association with the degree of carotid stenosis.\",\"authors\":\"Ondrej Machaczka, David Skoloudik, Jana Janoutova, Martin Roubec, Eva Reiterova, Martina Kovalova, Anna Zatloukalova, Petr Ambroz, Vladimir Janout\",\"doi\":\"10.32725/jab.2022.018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study constitutes a cross sectional analysis of the association between cognitive impairment defined by neuropsychological tests and carotid stenosis. The main objective was to compare the results of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) with regard to the degree of carotid stenosis. The sample comprised 744 patients who underwent a carotid duplex ultrasound and cognitive function testing (by ACE-R and MMSE). A multivariable analysis of potential confounding factors was completed. The significance of the different number of positive (MMSE ≤ 27, ACE-R ≤ 88) and negative (MMSE ≥ 28, ACE-R ≥ 89) results of the neuropsychological tests was analysed with regard to the degree of carotid stenosis (50-99%). Neuropsychological test results were also compared between carotid stenosis of 50-69%, 70-89%, and 90-99%. For both the MMSE and ACE-R, a difference was observed between positive and negative test results when higher degrees of stenosis were present. However, for the ACE-R only, more severe stenosis (80-89%, 90-99%) was predominantly associated with positive test results (p-value < 0.017). The same dependence for ACE-R (although not statistically significant) was observed in the group of patients without an ischemic stroke (confounding factor). In the case of the MMSE and more severe stenosis, negative results predominated, regardless of the confounding factor. There were no statistically significant differences in test results between carotid stenosis of 50-69%, 70-89%, and 90-99%. The results suggest that for assessing the early risk of cognitive impairment in patients with carotid atherosclerosis, the ACE-R appears more suitable than the MMSE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14912,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of applied biomedicine\",\"volume\":\"20 4\",\"pages\":\"115-123\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of applied biomedicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32725/jab.2022.018\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of applied biomedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32725/jab.2022.018","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究对神经心理测试定义的认知障碍与颈动脉狭窄之间的关系进行了横断面分析。主要目的是比较Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE)和Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination- revised (ACE-R)关于颈动脉狭窄程度的结果。样本包括744名接受颈动脉双相超声和认知功能测试(通过ACE-R和MMSE)的患者。完成了潜在混杂因素的多变量分析。分析不同神经心理测试阳性(MMSE≤27,ACE-R≤88)和阴性(MMSE≥28,ACE-R≥89)结果个数对颈动脉狭窄程度(50-99%)的意义。神经心理测试结果也比较了颈动脉狭窄50-69%、70-89%和90-99%。对于MMSE和ACE-R,当存在较高程度的狭窄时,观察到阳性和阴性测试结果之间的差异。然而,仅对于ACE-R,更严重的狭窄(80-89%,90-99%)主要与阳性检测结果相关(p值< 0.017)。在没有缺血性卒中(混杂因素)的患者组中观察到同样的ACE-R依赖性(尽管没有统计学意义)。在MMSE和更严重狭窄的情况下,阴性结果占主导地位,无论混杂因素如何。颈动脉狭窄50-69%、70-89%和90-99%的检测结果无统计学差异。结果表明,对于评估颈动脉粥样硬化患者认知功能障碍的早期风险,ACE-R似乎比MMSE更合适。
Neuropsychological tests and prediction of dementia in association with the degree of carotid stenosis.
This study constitutes a cross sectional analysis of the association between cognitive impairment defined by neuropsychological tests and carotid stenosis. The main objective was to compare the results of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) with regard to the degree of carotid stenosis. The sample comprised 744 patients who underwent a carotid duplex ultrasound and cognitive function testing (by ACE-R and MMSE). A multivariable analysis of potential confounding factors was completed. The significance of the different number of positive (MMSE ≤ 27, ACE-R ≤ 88) and negative (MMSE ≥ 28, ACE-R ≥ 89) results of the neuropsychological tests was analysed with regard to the degree of carotid stenosis (50-99%). Neuropsychological test results were also compared between carotid stenosis of 50-69%, 70-89%, and 90-99%. For both the MMSE and ACE-R, a difference was observed between positive and negative test results when higher degrees of stenosis were present. However, for the ACE-R only, more severe stenosis (80-89%, 90-99%) was predominantly associated with positive test results (p-value < 0.017). The same dependence for ACE-R (although not statistically significant) was observed in the group of patients without an ischemic stroke (confounding factor). In the case of the MMSE and more severe stenosis, negative results predominated, regardless of the confounding factor. There were no statistically significant differences in test results between carotid stenosis of 50-69%, 70-89%, and 90-99%. The results suggest that for assessing the early risk of cognitive impairment in patients with carotid atherosclerosis, the ACE-R appears more suitable than the MMSE.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Applied Biomedicine promotes translation of basic biomedical research into clinical investigation, conversion of clinical evidence into practice in all medical fields, and publication of new ideas for conquering human health problems across disciplines.
Providing a unique perspective, this international journal publishes peer-reviewed original papers and reviews offering a sensible transfer of basic research to applied clinical medicine. Journal of Applied Biomedicine covers the latest developments in various fields of biomedicine with special attention to cardiology and cardiovascular diseases, genetics, immunology, environmental health, toxicology, neurology and oncology as well as multidisciplinary studies. The views of experts on current advances in nanotechnology and molecular/cell biology will be also considered for publication as long as they have a direct clinical impact on human health. The journal does not accept basic science research or research without significant clinical implications. Manuscripts with innovative ideas and approaches that bridge different fields and show clear perspectives for clinical applications are considered with top priority.