...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry >Evaluation of the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria in the differentiation of Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia.
【24h】

Evaluation of the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria in the differentiation of Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia.

机译:阿尔茨海默病与思想痴呆症分化中的Nincds-Adrda标准的评价。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is now reliant on the use of NINCDS-ADRDA criteria. Other diseases causing dementia are being increasingly recognised--for example, frontotemporal dementia (FTD). Historically, these disorders have not been clearly demarcated from AD. This study assesses the capability of the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria to accurately distinguish AD from FTD in a series of pathologically proved cases. METHODS: The case records of 56 patients (30 with AD, 26 with FTD) who had undergone neuropsychological evaluation, brain imaging, and ultimately postmortem, were assessed in terms of whether at initial diagnosis the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria were successful in diagnosing those patients who had AD and excluding those who did not. RESULTS: (1) The overall sensitivity of the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria in diagnosing "probable" AD from 56 patients with cortical dementia (AD and FTD) was 0.93. However, the specificity was only 0.23; most patients with FTD also fulfilled NINCDS-ADRDA criteria for AD. (2) Cognitive deficits in the realms of orientation and praxis significantly increased the odds of a patient having AD compared with FTD, whereas deficits in problem solving significantly decreased the odds. Neuropsychological impairments in the domains of attention, language, perception, and memory as defined in the NINCDS-ADRDA statement did not contribute to the clinical differentiation of AD and FTD. CONCLUSION: NINCDS-ADRDA criteria fail accurately to differentiate AD from FTD. Suggestions to improve the diagnostic specificity of the current criteria are made.
机译:目的:Alzheimer疾病(广告)的诊断现在依赖于使用Nincds-Adrda标准。导致痴呆症的其他疾病正在越来越识别 - 例如,胎儿痴呆(FTD)。从历史上看,这些障碍尚未从广告中明确划分。本研究评估了Nincds-Adrda标准的能力,以在一系列病理证明的病例中精确地区分广告的广告。方法:在初步诊断初期诊断诊断这些患者方面,评估了56名患者(36名带有FTD)的案例记录(30例,患有FTD,26例,26例,患有FTD的AD,26例,脑成像和最终后期后期进行评估。谁有广告,排除那些没有的人。结果:(1)从皮质痴呆患者(AD和FTD)的56名患者诊断“可能”广告的核仁adrda标准的总体敏感性为0.93。但是,特异性只有0.23;大多数FTD患者也满足了AD的Nincds-Adrda标准。 (2)定向和Praxis领域的认知缺陷显着增加了与FTD相比具有广告患者的患者的几率,而问题解决的缺陷显着降低了赔率。在Nincds-Adrda声明中定义的关注,语言,感知和记忆域中的神经心理学障碍并未有助于广告和FTD的临床分化。结论:Nincds-Adrda标准无法准确地从FTD区分广告。提出提高当前标准的诊断特性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号