SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Clinical Utility of Skin Biopsy in Differentiating between Parkinson's Disease and Multiple System Atrophy.

Parkinsons Dis · 2015-04-06

DOI: 10.1155/2015/167038PMID: 25945280

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Background. It is often difficult to differentiate Parkinson's disease (PD) from multiple system atrophy (MSA), especially in their early stages. Objectives. To examine the clinical utility of histopathological analysis of biopsied skin from the chest wall and/or leg in differentiating between the two diseases. Methods. Skin biopsies from the lower leg and/or anterior chest wall were obtained from 38 patients with idiopathic PD (26 treated with levodopa and 12 levodopa-naïve) and 13 age-matched patients with MSA. We sought aggregates of phosphorylated α-synuclein on cutaneous nerve fibers using double fluorescence immunohistochemistry and confocal microscopy and measured intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD). Results. Phosphorylated α-synuclein aggregates were identified on cutaneous nerves in two patients with PD (5.3%) but in none of the patients with MSA, and IENFD was significantly lower in patients with PD when compared to those with MSA. There was no difference in IENFD between levodopa-treated and levodopa-naïve patients with PD. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that an assessment of IENFD in biopsied skin could be a useful means of differentiating between PD and MSA but that detection of α-synuclein aggregates on cutaneous nerves in the distal sites of the body is insufficiently sensitive.

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.