蒙特利尔认知评估量表在血管性认知功能障碍中的应用

目的 探讨蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)量表(中文版)在血管性认知功能障碍(VCI)中的应用.方法 选择166例具有脑血管病危险因素或脑血管疾病患者,根据VCI诊断标准分为无认知功能障碍(NCI)组(52例)、无痴呆的血管性认知功能障碍(VCIND)组(76例)及血管性痴呆(VD)组(38例),分别给予MoCA量表和简易精神状态检查(MMSE)量表测试.结果 将认知功能障碍MoCA分界值定为26分时,VCIND组MoCA的敏感性为90.79%,MMSE为26.31%;VD组MoCA的敏感性为100%,MMSE为86.84%;MoCA和MMSE特异性分别为84.62%和100%.结论 与MMSE量表相比,MoCA量表更适用于VCI的筛查.     

皮质下缺血性脑血管病认知功能障碍研究

目的应用系列神经心理学测试分析皮质下缺血性脑血管病(SIVD)患者的认知损害特征。方法入选SIVD患者53例,年龄及性别相当的健康老年人25例为正常对照组。SIVD患者按照认知损害的诊断标准分为血管性痴呆(VaD)组27例和血管性认知障碍非痴呆(VCIND)组26例。进行MMSE及血管性痴呆包括记忆力、注意力、语言、视空间结构及执行功能5个认知域在内的神经心理学测试,确定VCIND患者受损的认知域。结果①与正常对照组比较,VaD组患者各项量表测试均严重受损,具有统计学差异(P﹤0.05);②VCIND组患者MMSE、数字倒背评分下降,连线测验时间延长,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05);③VaD组与VCIND组相比,上述各项均受损严重,其中单词回忆、连线测验、画钟测验、数字广度测验评分差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。结论①SIVD患者同时存在多个认知域损害,以执行功能、注意力损害较为突出,记忆、语言受累相对较轻;②VCIND患者表现为执行功能、注意力受损,程度均低于VaD组,晚期VaD患者全面认知功能明显下降。     

血管性认知障碍的脑灌注研究

目的探讨血管性认知障碍(VCI)的危险因素,观察VCI患者的脑血流灌注情况。方法选取本院记忆障碍门诊就诊的急性脑梗死患者。所有患者在发病3月后行神经心理学量表评估及头颅MR(包括动态磁敏感对比增强扫描)检查,根据认知评定结果将患者分为认知正常组(对照组)、非痴呆性血管性认知障碍(VCIND)组和血管性痴呆(VaD)组。分析各组基本临床资料及额叶、颞叶、顶叶、丘脑、海马、后扣带回的灌注特点。结果共纳入对照组30例,VCIND组21例,VaD组21例。对照组糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)水平低于VCIND组及VaD组(P <0.005)。HbA1C是VCI的独立危险因素(P <0.005)。VCIND组右侧额颞叶的平均通过时间(MTT)及右侧后扣带回的达峰时间(TTP)大于对照组(P <0.005),VaD组双侧额叶、右侧颞叶、左侧顶叶、双侧后扣带回的MTT值大于对照组及VCIND组(P <0.005),VaD组双侧海马的MTT及TTP值大于对照组(P <0.005),VaD组左侧颞顶叶、双侧海马的相对脑血流量、相对脑血容量小于对照组(P <0.005)。结论高水平的HbA1C是VCI的独立危险因素。VCI患者存在脑灌注减低,早期以额叶、颞叶及后扣带回的轻度灌注损伤为主,后期损伤程度加重,海马等区域逐渐受累。     

神经心理测试及P300对皮质下缺血性脑血管病伴认知功能障碍患者评估研究

目的研究神经心理测试及听觉事件相关电位(event related potential,ERP)P300在皮质下缺血性脑血管病(subcortical ischemic vascular disease,SIVD)伴不同程度认知功能障碍的临床应用价值。方法 92例SIVD患者,其中血管性无痴呆型认知损害(vascular cognitive impairment no dementia,VCIND)45例,血管性痴呆(vascular dementia,VaD)47例,同时选取45例未发生脑梗死及认知功能障碍的正常人作为对照组。分别对2组患者住院治疗前及正常对照组进行神经心理测试认知评估量表MMSE、MoCA评分和听觉事件相关电位P300检测。结果入院治疗前,VCIND组、VaD组简易精神状态检查(MMSE)和蒙特利尔认知评估量表(MoCA)评分均较正常组偏低(P0.05),VCIND组较VaD组偏低(P0.05),P300检测:与正常对照组潜伏期(318.689±16.123)ms相比,VCIND组患者潜伏期(360.667±16.082)ms,VaD组患者潜伏期(420.333±21.149)ms,各组间听觉事件相关电位P300潜伏期差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 SIVD患者存在认知功能损害,以执行功能障碍为主,ERP-P300测试能客观反映VCIND患者早期认知功能障碍,P300潜伏期与MMSE及MoCA有相关性,有利于VCIND早期的诊断。     

轻度血管性认知障碍的结构影像学研究

血管性认知障碍(vascular cognitive impairment,VCI)包括无痴呆型血管性认知障碍(vascular cognitive impairment no dementia,VCIND)、血管性痴呆(vascular dementia,VaD)及混合性痴呆这一过程[1].神经影像学是VCI研究和诊...     

步长脑心通胶囊对血管性认知障碍非痴呆患者血浆Lp-PLA2活性的影响

目的 探讨步长脑心通胶囊对血管性认知障碍非痴呆(VCIND)患者血浆脂蛋白相关磷脂酶A2(Lp-PLA2)活性的影响.方法 对80例VCIND患者分为治疗组40例和对照组40例,同时设立正常对照组40例.治疗组服用步长脑心通胶囊(3粒,3次/d)连续3个月,对照组服用尼莫同(30 mg,3次/d)连续3个月,检测2组患者治疗前和治疗后血浆Lp-PLA2活性水平的变化.结果 脑心通治疗组和尼莫同对照组在治疗前血浆Lp-PLA2活性水平均高于正常对照组(P＜0.05).服药3个月后,脑心通治疗组血浆Lp-PLA2活性显著低于尼莫同对照组(P＜0.05).结论 VCIND患者血浆Lp-PLA2活性升高;步长脑心通胶囊能降低VCIND患者血浆Lp-PLA2活性水平.     

脑卒中患者认知功能情况及血管性认知障碍的影响因素

目的探讨脑卒中患者认知功能情况及血管性认知障碍(VCI)的影响因素。方法选取122例脑卒中患者,采用蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)量表评估患者认知功能并分组。MoCA评分24～30分的患者为认知功能正常组(正常组),20～23分的患者为非痴呆型血管性认知障碍组(VCIND组),0～19分的患者为血管性痴呆组(VaD组)。采集患者外周血进行同型半胱氨酸(Hcy)、超敏C反应蛋白(hsCRP)、IL-6、TNF-α检测。结果根据MoCA评分,122例患者分为正常组(30例)、VCIND组(30例)、VaD组(62例)。三组间文化程度、Hcy、IL-6、TNF-α的差异有统计学意义(均P0.05)。MoCA评分与hsCRP、Hcy、IL-6、TNF-α呈负相关(r=-0.179,P=0.049;r=-0.258,P=0.004;r=-0.644,P0.001;r=-0.723,P0.001)。Logistic回归分析结果显示,文化程度是VCI的保护因素(OR=0.270,P=0.006),IL-6、TNF-α是VCI的危险因素(OR=7.756,P=0.002;OR=10.020,P=0.042)。结论脑卒中患者hsCRP、Hcy、IL-6、TNF-α水平越高,MoCA评分越低。文化程度是VCI的保护因素,IL-6、TNF-α是VCI的危险因素。     

血管性认知功能障碍及痴呆患者血浆内皮素-1和血管内皮生长因子含量变化及意义

目的探讨血浆内皮素-1（ET-1）和血管内皮生长因子（VEGF）在血管性认知功能障碍（VCI）及痴呆（VaD）发病过程中的作用。方法脑梗死143例,随访3个月,依据蒙特利尔认知评估量表（MoCA）和临床痴呆评定量表（CDR）评分将其分为无认知功能障碍（N-VCI）组、血管性认知障碍无痴呆（VCIND）组、血管性痴呆（VaD）组,用放射免疫法测定血浆ET-1水平,酶联免疫分析法测定血浆VEGF的水平,并对血浆ET-1和VEGF进行相关性分析。结果 （1）VaD组患者血浆ET-1含量明显高于VCIND组及N-VCI组,VCIND组患者血浆ET-1水平明显高于N-VCI组,差异均具统计学意义（P〈0.01）;VaD组患者血浆VEGF含量明显低于VCIND组及N-VCI组,VCIND组亦明显低于N-VCI组,差异均具统计学意义（P〈0.01）。（2）血浆ET-1水平与VEGF存在明显负相关（r=-0.808,P〈0.01）。（3）VaD组患者血浆ET-1与MoCA值成负相关（r=-0.719,P〈0.01）,VaD患者血浆VEGF与MoCA评分成正相关（r=0.670,P=0.01）;而N-VCI、VCIND组患者血浆ET-1、VEGF与MoCA值无相关性（P〉0.05）。结论高ET-1和低VEGF参与了VCI及VaD的发生发展过程,血浆ET-1与VaD病情成正相关,血浆VEGF与VaD病情成负相关,这些指标的监测可作为判断VaD病情轻重的重要依据。     

脑出血患者血清脑源性神经营养因子与痴呆的相关性分析

目的探讨脑出血患者血清脑源性神经营养因子(BDNF)与痴呆的相关性。方法选取180例脑出血患者,出院后6个月根据认知功能评分分为血管性认知功能障碍组(VCI)60例,其中血管性痴呆组(VD)22例,非痴呆型血管性认知功能障碍组(VCIND)38例;对照组为无认知障碍者120例。入院后及出院后6个月采用酶联免疫吸附法(ELISA)检测血清BDNF水平,分析其与认知功能障碍的相关性。采用ROC曲线分析BDNF对VCI发生的预测价值。结果VCI组年龄、NIHSS评分、出血量、出血部位、Hcy水平及BDNF水平与对照组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。多因素分析示高龄、NIHSS评分高、大量出血、脑叶出血、Hcy水平升高及BDNF水平降低是脑出血患者发生VCI的危险因素(P<0.05)。出院时6个月VCIND组与对照组MMSE评分、BDNF水平均高于入院时(P<0.05)。出院后6个月VD组BDNF水平高于入院时(P<0.05)。出院后6个月3组MMSE评分比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),两两比较,VD组与VCIND组MMSE评分低于对照组(P<0.05),VD组MMSE评分低于VCIND组(P<0.05)。入院时及出院后6个月3组BDNF水平比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),两两比较,入院时及出院后6个月VD组与VCIND组BDNF水平均低于对照组(P<0.05),VD组BDNF水平低于VCIND组(P<0.05)。出院后6个月BDNF水平与MMSE评分呈正相关(P<0.05)。BDNF预测VD及预测VCIND的AUC面积分别为0.749、0.704,均>0.7,灵敏度分别为84.2%、85.9%,特异度分别为80.9%、80.6%。结论脑出血患者血清BDNF水平与出血后VCI的发生相关,随着BDNF水平的降低,VCI严重程度随之增加,且入院后血清BDNF水平可以预测VCI的发生,特别是VD发生的标记物之一,临床上血清BDNF水平低的患者需引起重视。     

石杉碱甲对不同严重程度血管性痴呆患者的疗效分析

目的:分析不同剂量石杉碱甲对不同严重程度血管性痴呆(VaD)的长期疗效。方法:纳入255例VaD患者,按痴呆程度不同分层。其中180例入组石杉碱甲组,随机给予不同剂量石杉碱甲(高剂量组:0.15mg;低剂量组:0.05mg);75例设为吡拉西坦(0.4g)为对照组,均连续用药52周。分别在0、12及52周末进行简易精神状态量表(MMSE)和日常生活能力(ADL)量表进行评定。结果:不同严重度VaD患者石杉碱甲高剂量组在治疗12周后MMSE、ADL评分改善最明显(P<0.05)。轻度VaD患者石杉碱甲高剂量组在治疗12周后MMSE、ADL评分改善疗效最好。结论:不同剂量石杉碱甲对VaD的疗效与剂量呈正相关,VaD患者的认知功能呈进行性下降,高剂量石杉碱甲能延缓VaD患者的认知功能下降。     

尼莫地平联合阿托伐他汀治疗血管性认知障碍的疗效观察

目的探讨尼莫地平联合阿托伐他汀治疗血管性认知障碍的临床疗效及其不良反应。方法将96例血管性认知障碍患者随机分为对照组和治疗组,每组48例,再根据神经心理学评分将每组分为VCIND和VaD两个亚组。对照组给予了常规治疗＋安慰剂治疗,治疗组予尼莫地平＋阿托伐他汀治疗,尼莫地平30mg/d,1日3次,阿托伐他汀20mg/d,晚上1次,疗程均为6个月。采用MoCA和ADL评分对患者进行神经心理学评分。结果与同组治疗前相比,治疗组治疗6个月后MoCA和ADL评分分值明显提高（P〈0.01）;与对照组相比,治疗组治疗后MoCA和ADL评分值提高（P〈0.05）。对照组中VCIND患者MoCA和ADL较治疗前降低（P〈0.05）;治疗组中VCIND患者较治疗前及对照组MoCA和ADL分值明显提高（P〈0.01）,VaD患者无明显提高（P〉0.05）。2组均未见严重的不良反应。结论尼莫地平联合阿托伐他汀治疗血管性认知障碍的临床疗效较好,不良反应少。     

急性缺血性卒中患者血管性认知障碍及其亚型的相关因素分析

目的探讨急性缺血性卒中患者血管性认知障碍(vascular cognitive impairment,VCI)及其亚型非痴呆性血管性认知障碍(VCI-no dementia,VCIND)与血管性痴呆(vascular dementia,Va D)发生的主要相关因素。方法选择2014年6月至2015年6月就诊于天津医科大学总医院神经内科的491例急性缺血性卒中患者为研究对象,应用前期已建立的血管性认知障碍数据库记录患者的一般人口学信息、病史、体格检查、血管危险因素、生化及影像检查信息,对患者进行美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale,NIHSS)评分、Essen评分及低分子肝素治疗急性卒中试验(the Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment,TOAST)分型,于发病(10±2)d进行蒙特利尔认知量表(Montreal Cognitive Assessment,Mo CA)、临床痴呆量表(Clinical Dementia Rating,CDR)、日常生活能力量表(Activities of Daily Living,ADL)评分,依据血管性认知障碍诊治指南中VCI的诊断及分类诊断标准将患者分为认知正常组(no cognitive impairment,NCI)和VCI组,VCI组包括VCIND组和Va D组,分析上述各项因素的组间差异及相关性。结果 491例急性缺血性卒中患者中VCI占69.86%,其中包括37.68%的VCIND和32.18%的Va D患者。1VCI组低受教育程度(P0.001)、糖尿病(P=0.005)、心脏病(P=0.045)、卒中家族史(P=0.005)、幕上病变(P0.001)的比例及卒中次数(P=0.014)、D-二聚体水平(P=0.001)、Essen评分(P=0.024)、NIHSS评分(P0.001)显著高于NCI组,女性(P=0.004)、幕下病变(P0.001)的比例及受教育年(P0.001)显著低于NCI组,差异均有显著性;Logistic回归分析显示低受教育程度、糖尿病、幕上病变和高D-二聚体水平是VCI的独立危险因素。2与VCIND组比较,Va D组患者既往卒中史(P=0.013)、TOAST分型中大动脉粥样硬化型梗死(P0.001)的比例及卒中次数(P=0.001)、Essen评分(P=0.032)、神经功能缺损程度(P=0.005)显著高于VCIND组,TOAST分型中小动脉闭塞型梗死(P0.001)、幕下病变(P0.001)的比例显著低于VCIND组,差异均有显著性;Logistic回归分析显示卒中次数、神经功能缺损程度、大动脉粥样硬化型梗死是Va D的独立危险因素,而幕下病变患者发生Va D的风险明显小于幕上病变患者。结论 VCI及其亚型的影响因素不同,与NCI比较,低受教育程度、糖尿病、幕上病变和高D-二聚体水平是VCI的独立危险因素;与VCIND比较,卒中次数、严重的神经功能缺损、TOAST分型中大动脉粥样硬化型梗死是Va D的独立危险因素。     

达纳康治疗血管性认知功能损害的临床研究

目的评价达纳康(Egb761)治疗血管性认知功能障碍的临床疗效和安全性.方法110例血管性认知功能损害的病人随机分配到治疗组和对照组;治疗组服用达纳康,每次80 mg,每日3次,而对照组服用丹参片,每次2片,每日3次,疗程均为3个月,并应用MMSE和ADL量表评价其疗效.结果治疗组MMSE评分增加较对照组多2.38,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01);治疗组ADL评分减少较对照组多0.41,但差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)结论达纳康治疗血管性认知功能损害安全有效.     

Spectrum of disease in vascular cognitive impairment.

The recognition that cognitive impairment of vascular origin is not limited to multi-infarct dementia has led to the development of several sets of new criteria for vascular dementia (VaD). We set out to define the spectrum of disease in patients presenting with vascular cognitive impairment (VCI). Of 412 patients consecutively seen at a memory clinic, 80 had VCI. These patients had vascular cognitive impairment not dementia (n = 19), VaD (n = 48), and mixed Alzheimer's disease-VaD (n = 13). Radiographic patterns were: white matter changes only (40%); multiple infarcts (30%); single strategic stroke (14%), and no identified lesion (16%). Of note, 19 (24%) of these patients meet none of the currently published criteria for VaD. To better understand and treat ischaemic causes of cognitive impairment, the concept of VaD should be expanded to include patients who do not meet traditional dementia criteria.     

Physical activity in vascular cognitive impairment: Systematic review with meta-analysis

BackgroundVascular cognitive impairment (VCI) is the second most common cause of cognitive impairment worldwide and includes a spectrum from vascular cognitive impairment no dementia (VCIND) to vascular dementia (VaD). There is no specific pharmacological treatment approved for VCI. Physical activity has been indicated to be a promising preventive measure for cognition, with direct as indirectly benefits, while improving several modifiable vascular risk factors, so potentially effective when considering VCI. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review with a meta-analysis approaching the potential preventive role of physical activity on VCI.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in 7 databases. A total of 6786 studies were screened and assessed for eligibility, culminating in the inclusion of 9 observational prospective studies assessing physical activity impact irrespectively the type for quality assessment and qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Quantitative synthesis was performed using the reported adjusted HRs. Physical activity was handled as a dichotomous variable, with two groups created (high versus low physical activity). Subgroup analyses were done for risk of bias, VaD and length of follow-up.ResultsThere was considerable methodological heterogeneity across studies. Only three studies reported significant associations. The overall effect was statistically significant (HR 0.68, 95%CI 0.54-0.86, I² 6.8%), with higher levels of physical activity associated with a smaller risk of VCI overtime, particularly VaD.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that physical activity is a potential preventive factor for vascular dementia. Insufficient data is available on VCIND. Randomized studies are desired to confirm these results.     

Clustering and switching during a semantic verbal fluency test contribute to differential diagnosis of cognitive impairment

The verbal fluency test (VFT) can be dissociated into "clustering" (generating words within subcategories) and "switching" (shifting between clusters), which may be valuable in differential diagnosis. In the current study, we investigated the validity of VFT in the differential diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD, n = 65), vascular dementia (VaD, n = 65), mild cognitive impairment (MCI, n = 92), and vascular cognitive impairment without dementia (VCIND, n = 76) relative to cognitively normal senior controls (NC, n = 374). We found that in the NC group, the total correct score was significantly correlated with age and education; males generated more subcategories; cluster size increased with education, and subcategory and switching decreased with age. A significantly progressive advantage was observed in VFT scores in the sequence NC > MCI/VCIND > AD/VaD, and this significantly discriminated dementia patients from the other groups. AD patients performed better in all four VFT scores than VaD patients. Subcategory and switching scores significantly distinguished AD from VaD patients (AD > VaD; mean difference, 0.50 for subcategory, P <0.05; 0.71 for switching, P <0.05). MCI patients scored higher than VCIND patients, but the difference did not reach statistical significance. These results suggest that semantic VFT is useful for the detection of MCI and VCIND, and in the differential diagnosis of cognitive impairment.     

皮质下缺血性血管性认知损害扩散张量成像研究

目的通过扩散张量成像(DTI)探讨皮质下缺血性血管性认知损害患者白质微结构变化及其与认知功能之间的相关性。方法采集49例皮质下缺血性脑血管病患者[轻度血管性痴呆(VaD)10例、非痴呆型血管性认知损害(VCIND)20例、认知功能正常19例]DTI数据并观察皮质下白质微结构改变,分析VaD组患者DTI参数与认知功能间的相关性。结果与对照组相比,VaD组内侧前额叶、前扣带回、胼胝体干、双侧顶叶、右侧颞叶、双侧眶额叶,以及VCIND组右侧额下回、右侧海马、双侧楔前叶FA值减低(均P=0.000);与VCIND组比较,VaD组内侧前额叶、前扣带回、胼胝体、双侧顶叶、右侧颞叶FA值减低(P=0.000)。与对照组相比,VaD组内侧前额叶、胼胝体、双侧顶叶、双侧颞叶、前扣带回,以及VCIND组双侧楔前叶、右侧海马MD值升高(均P=0.000);与VCIND组相比,VaD组右侧内侧前额叶、前扣带回、胼胝体干、双侧顶叶、双侧颞叶MD值升高(均P=0.000)。VaD组内侧前额叶FA值与数字连线测验A时呈显著负相关(r=-0.782,P=0.007),双侧额下回MD值与数字连线试验A时程呈显著正相关(r=0.877,P=0.001)。结论 DTI对皮质下缺血性认知损害患者白质微结构改变更敏感,能够反映患者认知功能早期异常改变;内侧前额叶白质微结构的改变是影响患者执行能力的重要因素。     

不同类型的血管性认知损害的执行功能障碍

目的 分析不同类型的血管性认知功能损害(VCI)患者的执行功能损害特征.方法 经头颅MRI证实为皮质下缺血性小血管病(SIVD)患者64例,其中16例单一的执行功能损害(s-VCI-ND)、26例多个认知领域损害(m-VCI-ND)和22例血管性痴呆(VaD)患者,完成一系列神经心理测验,包括总体认知水平、记忆、语言、注意/执行功能、空间结构能力等各个认知领域.其中执行功能检查包括定势转移、优势抑制、工作记忆、概念形成和流畅性5个分因子,共15种独立的分测验.结果 汉诺塔测验、示踪排序测验、同步听觉连续加法测验等在非痴呆VCI(VCI-ND)患者中的完成率低于50%,不适合VCI-ND的检测;s-VCI-ND组与健康对照组比较,分别反映4种执行功能成分的连线测验B耗时数(216.5±69.3、137.4±37.9)、Stroop色词测验卡片C耗时数(115.4±30.1、72.9±17.5)、卡片分类测验(1.9±1.4、2.7±1.2)和范畴流畅性测验(列举动物14.2±2.3、17.7±4.4)差异具有统计学意义(t=4.73、5.72、2.04、3.53,均P<0.05);VCI-ND的认知表现介于健康老人组和VaD组之间,其中m-VCI-ND有比较严重的执行功能损害和情景与语义记忆障碍,其认知缺损模式接近VaD,很可能是VaD的前期状态.结论 SIVD所致VCI的执行功能损害缺乏选择性,部分执行功能测验可以作为早期检测VCI-ND的敏感工具.     

The Consortium to Investigate Vascular Impairment of Cognition: methods and first findings

BACKGROUND: The Consortium to Investigate Vascular Impairment of Cognition (CIVIC) is a Canadian, multi-centre, clinic-based prospective cohort study of patients with Vascular Cognitive Impairment (VCI). We report its organization and the impact of diagnostic criteria on the study of VCI. METHODS: Nine memory disability clinics enrolled patients and recorded their usual investigations and care. A case report form included all vascular dementia (VaD) individual criteria for each of four sets (National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS-AIREN), Alzheimer's Disease Diagnostic Treatment Centers (ADDTC), the ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders (ICD-10), and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV)) of consensus-based diagnostic criteria and for the Hachinski Ischemia Score (HIS). Investigators, having completed the case report form, were asked to make a clinical judgement about the cognitive diagnosis based on the best available information, including neuroimaging. RESULTS: Of 1,347 patients (mean age 72 years; 56% women), 846 (63%) were diagnosed with dementia and 324 (24%) were diagnosed with VCI. The proportion of patients diagnosed with VaD by the diagnostic criteria was: 23.9% (n = 322) by DSM-IV, 10.2% (n = 137) by HIS, 4.3% (n = 58) by ICD-10, 3.8% (n = 51) by ADTCC, and 3.6% (n = 48) by NINDS-AIREN. Judged against a clinical diagnosis of VaD, the sensitivity/specificity of each was: DSM-IV (0.77/0.80); HIS (0.41/0.92); ICD-10 (0.29/0.98); ADTCC (0.24/0.98); NINDS-AIREN (0.42/0.995). Compared with a clinical diagnosis of VCI, sensitivities were lower for the diagnostic criteria, reflecting the exclusion of patients who did not have dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus-based criteria for VaD omit patients who do not meet dementia criteria that are modeled on Alzheimer's disease. Even for patients who do, the proportion identified with VaD varies widely. Criteria based on empirical analyses need to be developed and validated.