4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A clinical-radiological framework of the right temporal variant of frontotemporal dementia

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The concept of the right temporal variant of frontotemporal dementia (rtvFTD) is still equivocal. The syndrome accompanying predominant right anterior temporal atrophy has previously been described as memory loss, prosopagnosia, getting lost and behavioural changes. Accurate detection is challenging, as the clinical syndrome might be confused with either behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD) or Alzheimer’s disease. Furthermore, based on neuroimaging features, the syndrome has been considered a right-sided variant of semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA). Therefore, we aimed to demarcate the clinical and neuropsychological characteristics of rtvFTD versus svPPA, bvFTD and Alzheimer’s disease. Moreover, we aimed to compare its neuroimaging profile against svPPA, which is associated with predominant left anterior temporal atrophy. Of 619 subjects with a clinical diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia or primary progressive aphasia, we included 70 subjects with a negative amyloid status in whom predominant right temporal lobar atrophy was identified based on blinded visual assessment of their initial brain MRI scans. Clinical symptoms were assessed retrospectively and compared with age- and sex-matched patients with svPPA (n = 70), bvFTD (n = 70) and Alzheimer’s disease (n = 70). Prosopagnosia, episodic memory impairment and behavioural changes such as disinhibition, apathy, compulsiveness and loss of empathy were the most common initial symptoms, whereas during the disease course, patients developed language problems such as word-finding difficulties and anomia. Distinctive symptoms of rtvFTD compared to the other groups included depression, somatic complaints, and motor/mental slowness. Aside from right temporal atrophy, the imaging pattern showed volume loss of the right ventral frontal area and the left temporal lobe, which represented a close mirror image of svPPA. Atrophy of the bilateral temporal poles and the fusiform gyrus were associated with prosopagnosia in rtvFTD. Our results highlight that rtvFTD has a unique clinical presentation. Since current diagnostic criteria do not cover specific symptoms of the rtvFTD, we propose a diagnostic tree to be used to define diagnostic criteria and call for an international validation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer's disease: Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease

            The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association charged a workgroup with the task of revising the 1984 criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. The workgroup sought to ensure that the revised criteria would be flexible enough to be used by both general healthcare providers without access to neuropsychological testing, advanced imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid measures, and specialized investigators involved in research or in clinical trial studies who would have these tools available. We present criteria for all-cause dementia and for AD dementia. We retained the general framework of probable AD dementia from the 1984 criteria. On the basis of the past 27 years of experience, we made several changes in the clinical criteria for the diagnosis. We also retained the term possible AD dementia, but redefined it in a manner more focused than before. Biomarker evidence was also integrated into the diagnostic formulations for probable and possible AD dementia for use in research settings. The core clinical criteria for AD dementia will continue to be the cornerstone of the diagnosis in clinical practice, but biomarker evidence is expected to enhance the pathophysiological specificity of the diagnosis of AD dementia. Much work lies ahead for validating the biomarker diagnosis of AD dementia. Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Inc.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules.

              J Morris (1993)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Brain
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                0006-8950
                1460-2156
                August 24 2020
                August 24 2020
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Department of Neurology, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [4 ]Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
                [5 ]Lund University, Clinical Memory Research Unit, Lund, Sweden
                [6 ]UCL Institutes of Neurology and Healthcare Engineering, University College London, UK
                Article
                10.1093/brain/awaa225
                50149fed-a485-46a3-b3f1-9d470b2a4312
                © 2020

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article