RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Cognitive impairments in sporadic cerebral small vessel disease (SVD): a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohorts with stroke, dementia and non-clinical presentations of SVD
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.02.10.20020628
DO 10.1101/2020.02.10.20020628
A1 Hamilton, Olivia KL
A1 Backhouse, Ellen V
A1 Janssen, Esther
A1 Jochems, Angela CC
A1 Maher, Caragh
A1 Stevenson, Anna J
A1 Ritakari, Tuula E
A1 Xia, Lihua
A1 Deary, Ian J
A1 Wardlaw, Joanna M
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/02/11/2020.02.10.20020628.abstract
AB Background Cognitive impairment is a key clinical feature of cerebral small vessel disease (SVD), but the full range of SVD-related cognitive impairments is unclear, and little is known about how they might vary across clinical and non-clinical manifestations of SVD.Methods In systematic searches of OVID MEDLINE, Embase, and PsychINFO from 1st January 1985 to 6th October 2019, we identified studies reporting cognitive test results for study participants with SVD and control participants without SVD. Using standardised group-level cognitive test data, we performed random effects meta-analyses in seven cognitive domains to test whether cognitive test scores differed between SVD and control groups. We conducted meta-regression analyses to test whether differences in age, education, or vascular risk factors between SVD and control groups, or whether different clinical manifestations of SVD (e.g. stroke, cognitive impairment, or non-clinical presentations) accounted for cognitive effect sizes.Findings Of 8562 studies identified, we included 69 studies from six continents, published in four languages. These studies included 3229 participants with SVD and 3679 controls. Meta-analyses demonstrated that on average, control groups outperformed SVD cohorts on cognitive tests in all cognitive domains examined: executive function (estimate: -0.928; 95%CI: -1.08, -0.78); processing speed (-0.885; -1.17, -0.60); delayed memory (-0.898; -1.10, -0.69); language (-0.808; -1.01, -0.60); visuospatial ability (-0.720; -0.96, -0.48); reasoning (-0.634; -0.93, -0.34); and attention (-0.622; -0.94, -0.31; all p≤0.001). Meta-regression analyses suggested that differences in years of education between SVD and control groups may account for a proportion of the differences in performance on tests of executive function, visuospatial ability and language, and that cohorts with cognitive impairments performed more poorly on tests of executive function, delayed memory and visuospatial ability than cohorts with stroke or non-clinical presentations of SVD.Interpretation Participants with SVD demonstrated poorer cognitive performance relative to control groups in all cognitive domains we examined. This effect was present for all presentations of SVD, reinforcing the need to test a range of cognitive domains in both clinical and research settings. Lower levels of education in SVD versus control participants may contribute to these effects, highlighting the need to account for educational level in the assessment of SVD-related cognitive impairment.Funding None.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017080215 Funding StatementThe funders associated with this study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe datasets analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.