Semantic Dementia Versus Nonfluent Progressive Aphasia Neuropsychological Characterization and Differentiation
Semantic Dementia Versus Nonfluent Progressive Aphasia Neuropsychological Characterization and Differentiation
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/wad.0b013e318218206e
复制
发表时间：
2012-01-01
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
Hodges, John R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Carthery-Goulart, Maria Teresa;Knibb, Jonathan A.;Hodges, John R.
背景：早期进行性非流利性失语症（PNFA）在非专业背景下可能难以与语义性痴呆（SD）鉴别。PNFA和SD患者的临床和神经心理学概况的描述，但很少有系统comparison.Method：我们比较了SD（n = 27）和PNFA（n = 16）组的性能与可比的年龄，教育，疾病持续时间，和痴呆的严重程度作为衡量的临床痴呆症评定量表上一个全面的神经心理电池。结果：神经心理学变量分离良好，5个因素的解解释了总方差的78.4%。正如预期的那样，两组都是失范的，视觉空间功能和思维速度都得到了保留。SD患者在基于理解的语义测试中得分较低，在言语工作记忆和语音加工任务中表现较好。相反的模式被发现在PNFA group.Conclusions：神经心理学测试，检查言语和非言语语义协会，言语工作记忆，和语音处理是最有帮助的区分PNFA和SD。
Background: Early progressive nonfluent aphasia (PNFA) may be difficult to differentiate from semantic dementia (SD) in a nonspecialist setting. There are descriptions of the clinical and neuropsychological profiles of patients with PNFA and SD but few systematic comparisons.Method: We compared the performance of groups with SD (n = 27) and PNFA (n = 16) with comparable ages, education, disease duration, and severity of dementia as measured by the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale on a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Principal components analysis and intergroup comparisons were used.Results: A 5-factor solution accounted for 78.4% of the total variance with good separation of neuropsychological variables. As expected, both groups were anomic with preserved visuospatial function and mental speed. Patients with SD had lower scores on comprehension-based semantic tests and better performance on verbal working memory and phonological processing tasks. The opposite pattern was found in the PNFA group.Conclusions: Neuropsychological tests that examine verbal and nonverbal semantic associations, verbal working memory, and phonological processing are the most helpful for distinguishing between PNFA and SD.