4.2 Article

Clinical Staging of Semantic Dementia in an FDG-PET Study Using FTLD-CDR

期刊

DEMENTIA AND GERIATRIC COGNITIVE DISORDERS
卷 34, 期 5-6, 页码 300-306

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000345506

关键词

Semantic dementia; Clinical dementia rating; Frontotemporal lobar degeneration-clinical dementia rating; Positron emission tomography; Clinical dementia staging

资金

  1. Korea Healthcare Technology RD Project
  2. Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea [A102065]
  3. Medical Research Institute Grant [2010-15]
  4. Pusan National University Hospital
  5. IN-SUNG Foundation for Medical Research [CA58291]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The frontotemporal lobar degeneration-specific clinical dementia rating (FTLD-CDR), which was recently developed to measure frontotemporal dementia (FTD) severity, includes 2 items that assess language and behavior in addition to the 6 items of the conventional CDR. Methods: To investigate which of the 3 ratings, i.e. the global score of the CDR (GCDR), the behavioral domain score of the FTLD-CDR (BCDR), or the language domain score of the FTLD-CDR (LCDR), is most suitable for monitoring the progression of semantic dementia (SD), the number of hypometabolic voxels was calculated by comparing 28 SD patients in each stage of the 3 ratings with 63 age/sex-matched controls using voxel- based statistical parametric mapping. Results: The hypometabolic areas increased as a function of the LCDR score in SD patients. However, hypometabolic areas associated with the GCDR did not increase gradually as the stage increased. Furthermore, those associated with the BCDR showed the reverse pattern. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the severity and patterning of glucose hypometabolism measured by the LCDR correspond well with the natural course of SD reported in previous clinical and neuroimaging studies, whereas the BCDR and GCDR did not reflect disease progression in SD. Copyright (C) 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据