We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Frontal variant Alzheimer's disease: A systematic narrative synthesis.
BACKGROUND: Frontal variant Alzheimer's disease (fvAD) is considered a rare form of Alzheimer's disease (AD) which may be misdiagnosed as behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). The literature has tended to conflate behavioural and executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts and uses both AD diagnostic criteria and bvFTD diagnostic criteria to classify fvAD cohorts. The primary aim of this narrative synthesis was to summarise neuropsychological findings in fvAD cohorts in the context of established AD pathology.
METHODS: EMBASE, PsycINFO, PROQUEST and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies eligible for inclusion. Studies with both neuropsychological and biomarker evidence were included in the final narrative synthesis.
RESULTS: Ten studies were reviewed, including samples totalling 342 fvAD participants, 178 typical AD participants and 250 bvFTD participants. The review revealed areas worthy of further investigation that may aid differential diagnosis, including the degree of executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts relative to bvFTD cohorts, the onset of behavioural and cognitive symptomatology, and similarities between fvAD and typical AD cognitive profiles.
CONCLUSION: There was insufficient neuropsychological evidence to clearly differentiate fvAD and bvFTD cognitive phenotypes, however, the review has highlighted distinctive features of the two disorders that may guide differential diagnosis in future research. Moreover, the review has highlighted issues involving disparate diagnostic criteria used to classify fvAD cohorts, contributing to variation in findings.
METHODS: EMBASE, PsycINFO, PROQUEST and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies eligible for inclusion. Studies with both neuropsychological and biomarker evidence were included in the final narrative synthesis.
RESULTS: Ten studies were reviewed, including samples totalling 342 fvAD participants, 178 typical AD participants and 250 bvFTD participants. The review revealed areas worthy of further investigation that may aid differential diagnosis, including the degree of executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts relative to bvFTD cohorts, the onset of behavioural and cognitive symptomatology, and similarities between fvAD and typical AD cognitive profiles.
CONCLUSION: There was insufficient neuropsychological evidence to clearly differentiate fvAD and bvFTD cognitive phenotypes, however, the review has highlighted distinctive features of the two disorders that may guide differential diagnosis in future research. Moreover, the review has highlighted issues involving disparate diagnostic criteria used to classify fvAD cohorts, contributing to variation in findings.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app