Cargando…

Pro: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis?

Recent advances in the clinical diagnostic instruments for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease (AD) and in neuroimaging may cast doubt in the minds of some practitioners about the continued need for neuropathology to provide the ultimate diagnosis. Certainly the majority of cases of AD can be clinic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Esiri, Margaret M
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2876787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20497619
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/alzrt33
_version_ 1782181713351278592
author Esiri, Margaret M
author_facet Esiri, Margaret M
author_sort Esiri, Margaret M
collection PubMed
description Recent advances in the clinical diagnostic instruments for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease (AD) and in neuroimaging may cast doubt in the minds of some practitioners about the continued need for neuropathology to provide the ultimate diagnosis. Certainly the majority of cases of AD can be clinically correctly diagnosed by experienced clinicians but many cases are given this label by less experienced practitioners. Even after the most thorough work-up, a few cases of confidently diagnosed AD turn out to be something else when microscopy of the brain is undertaken. Even for neuropathologists, however, it can be difficult to correctly assign cognitive decline to the various pathological processes that can be found together in an older brain. We need further clinicopathogical study to enlighten us about, for example, the contribution of commonly found cerebrovascular disease to dementia. Human studies are also needed to explore the changes in pathology that new treatments for AD may produce.
format Text
id pubmed-2876787
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28767872011-05-07 Pro: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis? Esiri, Margaret M Alzheimers Res Ther Viewpoint Recent advances in the clinical diagnostic instruments for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease (AD) and in neuroimaging may cast doubt in the minds of some practitioners about the continued need for neuropathology to provide the ultimate diagnosis. Certainly the majority of cases of AD can be clinically correctly diagnosed by experienced clinicians but many cases are given this label by less experienced practitioners. Even after the most thorough work-up, a few cases of confidently diagnosed AD turn out to be something else when microscopy of the brain is undertaken. Even for neuropathologists, however, it can be difficult to correctly assign cognitive decline to the various pathological processes that can be found together in an older brain. We need further clinicopathogical study to enlighten us about, for example, the contribution of commonly found cerebrovascular disease to dementia. Human studies are also needed to explore the changes in pathology that new treatments for AD may produce. BioMed Central 2010-05-07 /pmc/articles/PMC2876787/ /pubmed/20497619 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/alzrt33 Text en Copyright ©2010 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Viewpoint
Esiri, Margaret M
Pro: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis?
title Pro: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis?
title_full Pro: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis?
title_fullStr Pro: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis?
title_full_unstemmed Pro: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis?
title_short Pro: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis?
title_sort pro: can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis?
topic Viewpoint
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2876787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20497619
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/alzrt33
work_keys_str_mv AT esirimargaretm procanneuropathologyreallyconfirmtheexactdiagnosis