RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: There is no effective treatment for progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP). Because results of immunochemical and pharmacologic studies suggest that the cholinergic system may play a role in the cognitive and motor features of PSP, the authors investigated the effects of donepezil (10 mg/day), an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, in 21 patients with PSP (mean age +/- SD; 65.7 +/- 4.7 years) by a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial. METHODS: Donepezil and placebo were administered for 6 weeks each with a 1-month washout period. Patients were evaluated before and at the end of each treatment phase. Outcome measures evaluated neuropsychiatric, global cognitive, frontal, memory, motor, and activities of daily living (ADL) status. RESULTS: Two patients withdrew during the washout phase because of unrelated medical problems. Donepezil-induced systemic side effects were transient and generally mild. Because of worsening of motor function, three patients received 5 mg/day of donepezil. All patients achieved blood and CSF therapeutic levels of donepezil. While the patients were taking donepezil, their Double Memory Test scores improved, whereas their ADL/mobility scores significantly worsened. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that acetylcholinesterase inhibitors such as donepezil have at best selective, modest effects on cognition in patients with PSP. In light of its deleterious effects on ADL/mobility, donepezil is not recommended for this patient population.
Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de la Colinesterasa/uso terapéutico , Indanos/uso terapéutico , Piperidinas/uso terapéutico , Parálisis Supranuclear Progresiva/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Donepezilo , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas , Escalas de Valoración Psiquiátrica , Calidad de Vida , Parálisis Supranuclear Progresiva/psicologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To describe ideomotor apraxia in patients with corticobasal degeneration and those with progressive supranuclear palsy, two parkinsonian disorders that are often misdiagnosed due to the overlap in their clinical features, and to determine whether systematic apraxia testing is useful for differential diagnosis. METHODS: Fourteen patients fulfilling National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke-Society for Progressive Supranuclear Palsy clinical criteria for progressive supranuclear palsy, 13 patients fulfilling modified Lang criteria for corticobasal degeneration, and 12 normal healthy control subjects were given the Test of Oral and Limb Apraxia, which was scored according to the Florida Apraxia Battery for occurrence of various types of apraxic errors. RESULTS: Both patients with progressive supranuclear palsy and corticobasal degeneration committed a greater number of apraxic errors than normal healthy control subjects on both transitive and intransitive tasks (p < 0.001 in both cases), but apraxia was much more severe in patients with corticobasal degeneration than progressive supranuclear palsy (p < 0.001). The index of apraxia severity, in combination with the assessment of the two key features of progressive supranuclear palsy (falls and vertical gaze palsy), correctly classified all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with corticobasal degeneration show more severe ideomotor apraxia than patients with progressive supranuclear palsy, and systematic assessment of ideomotor apraxia facilitates the differential diagnosis between patients with progressive supranuclear palsy and those with corticobasal degeneration.