Suppr超能文献

执行功能障碍是否定义了阿尔茨海默病的额颞叶变异型?

Does executive impairment define a frontal variant of Alzheimer's disease?

机构信息

Aged Care Services, Heidelberg Repatriation Hospital, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.

出版信息

Int Psychogeriatr. 2010 Dec;22(8):1280-90. doi: 10.1017/S1041610210001596. Epub 2010 Aug 19.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

People with Alzheimer's disease (AD) who present with prominent frontal features such as a dysexecutive syndrome may be difficult to differentiate clinically from subjects with frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). This study was performed to improve the differential diagnosis between AD and FTLD and to better characterize the AD subgroup with greater executive dysfunction.

METHODS

Using a well-defined prospectively studied cohort of cognitively impaired subjects, which included those with AD and with FTLD, we nominated a frontal variant of AD (FvAD) group as those AD subjects with the lowest quartile of scores on the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB), indicating greatest executive dysfunction, and compared them with the rest of the AD cases (whom we called the AD group) and those with FTLD across several baseline variables including cognitive, functional and behavioral scales. We also compared the changes from baseline for these three groups at 6 and 12 months. Additionally, we controlled for dementia severity by matching AD and FTLD cases on a functional scale, the SMAF, and repeated the same comparisons with these severity-matched groups.

RESULTS

The 114 FvAD subjects had a mean age of 78.1 years and Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) scores of 16.6, and the (remaining) AD group had a mean age of 78.4 years and MMSE of 22.4. There were 30 FTLD subjects with a mean age at baseline of 70.9 years and a mean baseline MMSE of 23.4. The FvAD group was significantly more severely impaired than the other two groups on all baseline assessments except the behavioral scale, the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), where there was insignificantly less impairment than in the FTLD group. In the analysis of subjects matched at baseline for functional impairment, the FvAD and FTLD groups were not significantly different on most assessment scales although on the FAB, clock-drawing and MMSE the FvAD subjects were still significantly more impaired. These two severity-matched groups were also similar in other baseline characteristics except for older age and less psychotropic use in the FvAD group. The severity-matched FvAD group was significantly different from the AD group in almost all assessment scales. All three unmatched and matched groups declined similarly over 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

When groups were not matched for baseline severity, the use of the FAB defined a group of AD subjects with greater executive dysfunction that were distinguished from both the remainder of the AD and FTLD subjects in almost all domains except behavioral disturbance and probably were just more severely affected AD subjects. The FAB is thus more useful as a marker of dementia severity than as a scale to detect a frontal variant of AD or to distinguish AD from FTLD. Controlling for severity, however, did allow the definition of a subgroup of AD subjects that more closely resembled FTLD subjects than the remainder of the AD subjects. It is proposed that subjects with dementia presenting with greater executive impairment but without prominent behavioral symptoms are likely to have AD rather than FTLD, especially if they are quite functionally impaired. With time FTLD subjects develop increasing executive dysfunction and increasingly resemble the more severely affected AD subjects.

摘要

背景

表现为执行功能障碍综合征等突出额叶特征的阿尔茨海默病 (AD) 患者在临床上可能难以与额颞叶变性 (FTLD) 患者区分。 本研究旨在提高 AD 和 FTLD 之间的鉴别诊断能力,并更好地描述具有更大执行功能障碍的 AD 亚组的特征。

方法

我们使用经过明确定义的前瞻性认知障碍受试者队列,其中包括 AD 和 FTLD 患者,将额叶 AD 变异型 (FvAD) 组命名为额叶评估量表 (FAB) 得分最低四分位数的 AD 受试者,表明存在最大的执行功能障碍,并将他们与其余 AD 病例(我们称为 AD 组)和 FTLD 进行比较,比较的基线变量包括认知、功能和行为量表。我们还比较了这三组在 6 个月和 12 个月时的基线变化。此外,我们通过在功能量表 SMAF 上对 AD 和 FTLD 病例进行匹配来控制痴呆严重程度,并对这些严重程度匹配的组重复相同的比较。

结果

114 名 FvAD 受试者的平均年龄为 78.1 岁,迷你精神状态检查 (MMSE) 评分为 16.6,其余 AD 组的平均年龄为 78.4 岁,MMSE 评分为 22.4。30 名 FTLD 受试者的平均基线年龄为 70.9 岁,平均基线 MMSE 评分为 23.4。FvAD 组在所有基线评估中均比其他两组严重受损,除了神经精神问卷 (NPI) 的行为量表外,FvAD 组的受损程度明显低于 FTLD 组。在对功能损伤进行基线匹配的受试者分析中,FvAD 和 FTLD 组在大多数评估量表上没有显著差异,尽管在 FAB、画钟和 MMSE 上,FvAD 受试者的受损程度仍然显著更严重。这两个严重程度匹配的组在其他基线特征上也相似,除了 FvAD 组年龄较大和使用精神药物较少。严重程度匹配的 FvAD 组在几乎所有评估量表上与 AD 组均有显著差异。所有三组未匹配和匹配的组在 12 个月内均相似。

结论

当不按基线严重程度进行匹配时,FAB 的使用定义了一组具有更大执行功能障碍的 AD 患者,这些患者在除行为障碍外的几乎所有领域都与 AD 和 FTLD 患者区分开来,可能只是 AD 患者的严重程度更高。因此,FAB 作为一种衡量痴呆严重程度的指标比作为一种检测 AD 额叶变异型或区分 AD 与 FTLD 的量表更有用。然而,控制严重程度确实可以定义一个更类似于 FTLD 患者的 AD 患者亚组,而不是其余的 AD 患者。建议表现出更大执行障碍但没有明显行为症状的痴呆患者更有可能患有 AD 而不是 FTLD,尤其是如果他们的功能受损相当严重。随着时间的推移,FTLD 患者会逐渐出现执行功能障碍,并越来越类似于病情更严重的 AD 患者。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验