-
Frontiers in Neurology 2022Currently, little is known about Chinese-speaking primary progressive aphasia (PPA) patients compared to patients who speak Indo-European languages. We examined the...
INTRODUCTION
Currently, little is known about Chinese-speaking primary progressive aphasia (PPA) patients compared to patients who speak Indo-European languages. We examined the demographics and clinical manifestations, particularly reading and writing characteristics, of Chinese patients with PPA over the last two decades to establish a comprehensive profile and improve diagnosis and care.
METHODS
We reviewed the demographic features, clinical manifestations, and radiological features of Chinese-speaking PPA patients from 56 articles published since 1994. We then summarized the specific reading and writing errors of Chinese-speaking patients.
RESULTS
The average age of onset for Chinese-speaking patients was in their early 60's, and there were slightly more male patients than female patients. The core symptoms and images of Chinese-speaking patients were similar to those of patients who speak Indo-European languages. Reading and writing error patterns differed due to Chinese's distinct tone and orthography. The types of reading errors reported in Chinese-speaking patients with PPA included tonal errors, regularization errors, visually related errors, semantic errors, phonological errors, unrelated errors, and non-response. Among these errors, regularization errors were the most common in semantic variant PPA, and tonal errors were specific to Chinese. Writing errors mainly consisted of non-character errors (stroke, radical/component, visual, pictograph, dyskinetic errors, and spatial errors), phonologically plausible errors, orthographically similar errors, semantic errors, compound word errors, sequence errors, unrelated errors, and non-response.
CONCLUSION
This paper provides the latest comprehensive demographic information and unique presentations on the reading and writing of Chinese-speaking patients with PPA. More detailed studies are needed to address the frequency of errors in reading and writing and their anatomical substrates.
PubMed: 36561305
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.1025660 -
Cephalalgia : An International Journal... Apr 2023Headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis, previously also termed pseudomigraine with temporary neurologic symptoms and lymphocytic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis, previously also termed pseudomigraine with temporary neurologic symptoms and lymphocytic pleocytosis, is a self-limiting syndrome characterized by moderate to severe headache associated with focal neurological deficits occurring in the context of lymphocytosis in the cerebrospinal fluid. As a consequence of its rarity, data regarding headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis is sparse. Therefore, we conducted this review to analyze data related to 93 patients of headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis, to characterize their demographics, clinical manifestations, investigations and treatment options.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of cases reported through PubMed and Google scholar database, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol. Keywords used were 'Headache with Neurologic Deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis', 'Headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis syndrome'. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool.
RESULTS
We analyzed a total of 93 cases of headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis with a mean age of 28.8 years at onset. Seventy patients (75.2%) were adults, while 23 (24.7%) belonged to the pediatric age group. Comparing these groups, mean age at onset was 32.5 years and 14.3 years, respectively. The average duration of follow-up was 11.08 months. Thirty percent of patients experienced relapsing episodes of headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis symptoms. The most common type of headache reported was unilateral severe throbbing episodic headache. Other associated symptoms included sensory deficit (60%) and motor deficits (54.8%). The least common symptoms were nystagmus and agraphia, which were reported in one patient each. Antiviral agents were a common treatment option in the acute phase (n = 23 patients [23.6%]), while Flunarizine was the most commonly used agent in the chronic setting (n = 3 patients [3.2%]). While most of the patients had normal brain magnetic resonance imaging, 20 patients had magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities, including (but not limited to) non-specific white matter lesions (eight patients) and meningeal enhancement (six patients). The most common electroencephalographic findings included diffuse and focal slowing. The mean cerebrospinal fluid opening-pressure was 240.5 mmHO. Cerebrospinal fluid protein was elevated in 59 (63.4%) patients, with a mean value of 114 mg/dL. Two patients in our cohort were found to have cerebrospinal fluid oligoclonal bands.
CONCLUSION
Headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis tends to affect young individuals with a slight male predominance. Unilateral severe throbbing episodic headache with associated hemi-paresthesia and hemiparesis were the most common symptoms based on our review. Elevated cerebrospinal fluid opening-pressure can be seen in headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis syndrome. Early recognition of the syndrome is paramount. Antivirals were found to be among the most widely used treatments in the acute setting. Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain is mostly normal. Diffuse and focal slowing were among the most common electroencephalographic findings. Cerebral flow abnormalities on perfusion scans are not uncommon in headache with neurologic deficits and cerebrospinal fluid lymphocytosis. Prospective studies with a larger sample size are needed to validate our findings and guide the clinical care of these patients.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Male; Child; Female; Lymphocytosis; Prospective Studies; Headache; Cerebrospinal Fluid Pressure; Brain
PubMed: 36856002
DOI: 10.1177/03331024231157694 -
Children (Basel, Switzerland) Dec 2023Handwriting abnormalities in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have sometimes been reported both (i) at the product level (i.e.,... (Review)
Review
Is There a Deficit in Product and Process of Handwriting in Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder? A Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Research.
Handwriting abnormalities in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have sometimes been reported both (i) at the product level (i.e., quality/legibility of the written trace and speed of writing) and (ii) at the process level (i.e., dynamic and kinematic features, such as on-paper and in-air durations, pen pressure and velocity peaks, etc.). Conversely, other works have failed to reveal any differences between ADHD and typically developing children. The question of the presence and nature of handwriting deficits in ADHD remains open and merits an in-depth examination. The aim of this systematic review was, therefore, to identify studies that have investigated the product and/or process of handwriting in children with ADHD compared to typically developing individuals. This review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement. A literature search was carried out using three electronic databases. The methodological quality of the studies was systematically assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) criteria. Twenty-one articles were identified. Of these, 17 described handwriting quality/legibility, 12 focused on speed and 14 analyzed the handwriting process. All the studies (100%) with satisfactory methodology procedures reported an impaired product and process in children with ADHD, while 25% evidenced a difference in the speed of production. Most importantly, the studies differed widely in their methodological approaches. Substantial gaps remain, particularly with regard to ascertaining comorbidities, ADHD subtypes and the medical status of the included children. The lack of overall homogeneity in the samples calls for higher quality studies. We conclude with recommendations for further studies.
PubMed: 38255345
DOI: 10.3390/children11010031