The dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) Consortium has revised criteria for the clinical and pathologic diagnosis of DLB incorporating new information about the core clinical features and suggesting improved methods to assess them. REM sleep behavior disorder, severe neuroleptic sensitivity, and reduced striatal dopamine transporter activity on functional neuroimaging are given greater diagnostic weighting as features suggestive of a DLB diagnosis. The 1-year rule distinguishing between DLB and Parkinson disease with dementia may be difficult to apply in clinical settings and in such cases the term most appropriate to each individual patient should be used. Generic terms such as Lewy body (LB) disease are often helpful. The authors propose a new scheme for the pathologic assessment of LBs and Lewy neurites (LN) using alpha-synuclein immunohistochemistry and semiquantitative grading of lesion density, with the pattern of regional involvement being more important than total LB count. The new criteria take into account both Lewy-related and Alzheimer disease (AD)-type pathology to allocate a probability that these are associated with the clinical DLB syndrome. Finally, the authors suggest patient management guidelines including the need for accurate diagnosis, a target symptom approach, and use of appropriate outcome measures. There is limited evidence about specific interventions but available data suggest only a partial response of motor symptoms to levodopa: severe sensitivity to typical and atypical antipsychotics in approximately 50%, and improvements in attention, visual hallucinations, and sleep disorders with cholinesterase inhibitors.

Dementia has been increasingly more recognized to be a common feature in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), especially in old age. Specific criteria for the clinical diagnosis of dementia associated with PD (PD‐D), however, have been lacking. A Task Force, organized by the Movement Disorder Study, was charged with the development of clinical diagnostic criteria for PD‐D. The Task Force members were assigned to sub‐committees and performed a systematic review of the literature, based on pre‐defined selection criteria, in order to identify the epidemiological, clinical, auxillary, and pathological features of PD‐D. Clinical diagnostic criteria were then developed based on these findings and group consensus. The incidence of dementia in PD is increased up to six times, point‐prevelance is close to 30%, older age and akinetic‐rigid form are associated with higher risk. PD‐D is characterized by impairment in attention, memory, executive and visuo‐spatial functions, behavioral symptoms such as affective changes, hallucinations, and apathy are frequent. There are no specific ancillary investigations for the diagnosis; the main pathological correlate is Lewy body‐type degeneration in cerebral cortex and limbic structures. Based on the characteristic features associated with this condition, clinical diagnostic criteria for probable and possible PD‐D are proposed. © 2007 Movement Disorder Society

Early Parkinson's disease can be managed successfully for up to five years with a reduced risk of dyskinesia by initiating treatment with ropinirole alone and supplementing it with levodopa if necessary.

A preceding article described the clinical features of Parkinson's disease dementia (PD‐D) and proposed clinical diagnostic criteria for “probable” and “possible” PD‐D. The main focus of this article is to operationalize the diagnosis of PD‐D and to propose pratical guidelines based on a two level process depending upon the clinical scenario and the expertise of the evaluator involved in the assessment. Level I is aimed primarily at the clinician with no particular expertise in neuropsychological methods, but who requires a simple, pragmatic set of tests that are not excessively time‐consuming. Level I can be used alone or in concert with Level II, which is more suitable when there is the need to specify the pattern and the severity on the dementia of PD‐D for clinical monitoring, research studies or pharmacological trials. Level II tests can also be proposed when the diagnosis of PD‐D remains uncertain or equivocal at the end of a Level I evaluation. Given the lack of evidence‐based standards for some tests when applied in this clinical context, we have tried to make practical and unambiguous recommendations, based upon the available literature and the collective experience of the Task Force. We accept, however, that further validation of certain tests and modifications in the recommended cut off values will be required through future studies. © 2007 Movement Disorder Society

No abstract