[Validity of vascular depression as a specific diagnostic: a review]

A number of authors have suggested that cerebrovascular disease may predispose, precipitate, or perpetuate some geriatric depressive syndromes. These "vascular depressions" may result from damage of striato-pallido-thalamo-cortical pathways which frequently occurs in cerebrovascular disease.

We have searched the English and French literature published between 1996 (when the "vascular depression" hypothesis was first stated) and December 2004 through the Medline computer database and examined the validity of the concept of "vascular depression" thanks to four levels of validity: face validity, descriptive validity, construct validity and predictive validity. The face validity is the extent to which experts agree about the existence of a nosological entity.

The reviews published in this field broadly support the concept of "vascular depression" as a specific disorder. However many authors highlighted the fact that depression has been shown to precede vascular diseases and that depression and vascular diseases may both share some pathogenic or genetic determinants. These interactive and co-morbid relationships between depression and cerebrovascular diseases are difficult to disentangle. The descriptive validity refers to the degree of the clinical specificity of a disorder. It appears only moderate regarding the clinical studies carried out on this issue. However, a late-onset, the absence of a family history of mental illness, the lack of insight, lassitude, psychomotor retardation, a greater disability and particular neuropsychological dysfunctions may be associated with vascular depression. The construct validity, which refers to the degree to which the physiopathological processes involved in an illness are understood, appears difficult to establish because of the complex interactive relationships between cerebrovascular disease and depression. However, cerebrovascular diseases may contribute to the occurrence of depressive symptoms independently of its psychosocial burden. The predictive validity refers to the degree to which a syndrome is characterized by a specific response to treatment or a specific natural history. As regards response to treatment, vascular depression appears rather specific in the sense of a worse response to antidepressants and electroconvulsive therapy. The studies on the natural history of vascular depression lead to inconsistent results. According to some authors, this relative resistance to treatment may be explained by structural rather than functional, and thus potentially irreversible disruption in neural networks.

In conclusion, the systematic review of the validity of vascular depression broadly supports this concept. However, further studies are needed to decipher the relationships between depression and cerebrovascular disease. Finally, we suggest that it could be more relevant for future researches in this field if the diagnostic criteria for vascular depression were narrowed and required the presence of both neuro-imaging changes and cerebrovascular disease.