Comparison of Different Clinical Criteria (DSM-III, ADDTC, ICD-10, NINDS-AIREN, DSM-IV) for the Diagnosis of Vascular Dementia

Author:

Pohjasvaara T.1,Mäntylä R.1,Ylikoski R.1,Kaste M.1,Erkinjuntti T.1

Affiliation:

1. From the Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Memory Research Unit (T.P., R.Y., T.E.), Stroke Unit (M.K.), and Department of Radiology (R.M.), Helsinki University Central Hospital (Finland).

Abstract

Background and Purpose —The criteria for vascular dementia (VaD) include definition of the cognitive syndrome and the vascular cause. Different criteria for dementia identify different frequencies and clusters of patients. In addition, variation in defining the cause and etiology may have an effect. We compared different clinical criteria for VaD in series of patients with poststroke dementia. Methods —The study group comprised 107 patients fulfilling the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition (DSM-III) definition for dementia from a cohort of consecutive patients with ischemic stroke who completed a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery and MRI. The mean age (SD) of the patients was 71.4 (7.6) years. The definitions of vascular cause of VaD were those of the DSM-III (1980), Alzheimer’s Disease Diagnostic and Treatment Centers (ADDTC; 1992), International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10; 1992), National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke–Association Internationale pour la Recherche et l’Enseignement en Neurosciences (NINDS-AIREN; 1993), and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV; 1994). Results —The number of cases that could be classified as VaD according to the different criteria varied considerably: 36.4% (n=39) by DSM-III, 86.9% (n=93) by ADDTC, 32.7% (n=35) by NINDS-AIREN, 36.4% (n=39) by ICD-10, and 91.6% (n=98) by DSM-IV criteria. The concordance between DSM-III/ICD-10 was perfect (100%; κ=1.0), between ICD-10/NINDS-AIREN and ADDTC/DSM-IV good to moderate (85.0% and 87.3%; κ=0.87 and 0.37, respectively), but otherwise poor between the other criteria. Only 31 patients fulfilled all the criteria for VaD applied. Major discriminating factors between the criteria were requirement of (1) focal neurological signs, (2) unequal distribution of deficits in higher cortical functions, and (3) evidence of relevant CVD based on brain imaging findings. Conclusions —Current criteria of VaD identify different frequencies and clusters of patients and are not interchangeable. Optimally, prospective studies with clinicopathological correlation could identify new criteria. Meanwhile, focus on more homogeneous subtypes (eg, small-vessel subcortical VaD) and detailed neuroimaging criteria could improve the diagnostics.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Advanced and Specialized Nursing,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Neurology (clinical)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3