SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness changes in Parkinson disease: a meta-analysis.

PLoS One · 2014-01-21

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085718PMID: 24465663

Open accessMeta-Analysis; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundParkinson disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative process that leads to a selective loss of dopaminergic neurons, mainly in the basal ganglia of the brain. Numerous studies have analyzed the ability of optical coherence tomography (OCT) to detect retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness abnormalities and changes in PD, but the results have not always been consistent. Therefore, we carried out a meta-analysis to evaluate the RNFL thickness measured with OCT in PD.Methods and findingsCase-control studies were selected through an electronic search of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, PUBMED and EMBASE. For the continuous outcomes, we calculated the weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The statistical analysis was performed by RevMan 5.0 software. Thirteen case-control studies were included in the present meta-analysis, containing a total of 644 eyes in PD patients and 604 eyes in healthy controls. The results of our study showed that there was a significant reduction in average RNFL thickness in patients with PD compared to healthy controls (WMD = -5.76, 95% CI: -8.99 to -2.53, P = 0.0005). Additionally, differences of RNFL thickness in superior quadrant (WMD = -4.44, 95% CI: -6.93 to -1.94, P = 0.0005), inferior quadrant (WMD = -7.56, 95% CI: -11.33 to -3.78, PConclusionIn view of these results and the noninvasive nature of OCT technology, we surmise that OCT could be a useful tool for evaluating the progression of the Parkinson disease.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01928212.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.