Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Exp Gerontol. 2012 Nov;47(11):825-33. doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2012.06.001. Epub 2012 Jun 15.
Here, we summarise the results after carrying out a large survey regarding the assessment of vascular alterations, both vessel changes and vascular lesions in an inter-laboratory setting. In total, 32 neuropathologists from 22 centres, most being members of BrainNet Europe (BNE), participated by filling out a questionnaire with emphasis on assessment of common vascular alterations seen in the brains of aged subjects. A certain level of harmonisation has been reached among BNE members regarding sectioning of the brain, harvesting of brain tissue for histology and staining used when compared to the survey carried out in 2006 by Pantoni and colleagues. The most significant variability was seen regarding the assessment of severity and of clinical significance of vascular alterations. Two strategies have recently been recommended regarding the assessment of vascular alterations in aged and demented subjects. The National Institute on Aging - Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA) recommends the assessment of hippocampal sclerosis, vascular brain injury and microvascular lesions in 12 regions. Although this strategy will be easy to follow, the recommendations do not inform how the load of observed alterations should be assessed and when the observed lesions are of significance. Deramecourt and his colleagues recommend an assessment and semiquantitative grading of various pathologies in 4 brain regions. This strategy yielded a total score of 0 to 20 as an estimate of pathology load. It is, however, not clear which score is considered to be of clinical significance. Furthermore, in several BNE trials the semiquantitative assessment has yielded poor agreement rates; an observation that might negatively influence the strategy proposed by Deramecourt and his colleagues. In line with NIA-AA, a dichotomised approach of easily recognisable lesions in a standardised set of brain regions harvested for neuropathological assessment and applying reproducible sampling and staining strategies is recommended by BNE. However, a simple strategy regarding assessment of load of alteration is urgently needed to yield reproducible, and at the same time, comparable results between centres.
在这里,我们总结了一项大型调查的结果,该调查涉及在实验室间环境中评估血管改变,包括血管变化和血管病变。共有来自 22 个中心的 32 名神经病理学家参与,其中大多数是 BrainNet Europe (BNE) 的成员,他们通过填写一份重点评估老年受试者大脑中常见血管改变的问卷来完成调查。与 2006 年 Pantoni 及其同事进行的调查相比,BNE 成员在大脑切片、组织学采集和染色方面已经达到了一定程度的协调。在评估血管改变的严重程度和临床意义方面,存在最大的差异。最近,针对老年和痴呆患者的血管改变评估,提出了两种策略。国家老龄化研究所-阿尔茨海默病协会(NIA-AA)建议在 12 个区域评估海马硬化、血管性脑损伤和微血管病变。尽管这种策略易于遵循,但这些建议并未告知如何评估观察到的改变负担,以及何时观察到的病变具有重要意义。Deramecourt 及其同事建议在 4 个脑区评估和半定量分级各种病理学。这种策略产生了 0 到 20 的总分,作为病理学负荷的估计。然而,尚不清楚哪个分数被认为具有临床意义。此外,在几项 BNE 试验中,半定量评估的一致性较差;这一观察结果可能会对 Deramecourt 及其同事提出的策略产生负面影响。与 NIA-AA 一致,BNE 建议采用一种在为神经病理学评估采集的标准化脑区中易于识别的病变的二分法方法,并应用可重复的取样和染色策略。然而,迫切需要一种简单的评估改变负荷的策略,以在中心之间产生可重复且同时可比的结果。