SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Vascular Parkinsonism and cognitive impairment: literature review, Brazilian studies and case vignettes.

Dement Neuropsychol · 2012-07-01

DOI: 10.1590/s1980-57642012dn06030005PMID: 29213787

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Vascular Parkinsonism (VP) is a form of secondary Parkinsonism resulting from cerebrovascular disease. Estimates of the frequency of VP vary greatly worldwide; 3% to 6% of all cases of Parkinsonism are found to have a vascular etiology. In a Brazilian community-based study on Parkinsonism, 15.1% of all cases were classified as VP, the third most common form, with a prevalence of 1.1% in an elderly cohort. Another Brazilian survey found a prevalence of 2.3% of VP in the elderly. VP is usually the result of conventional vascular risk factors, particularly hypertension, leading to strategic infarcts of subcortical gray matter nuclei, diffuse white matter ischaemic lesions and less commonly, large vessel infarcts. Patients with VP tend to be older and present with gait difficulties, symmetrical predominant lower-body involvement, poor levodopa responsiveness, postural instability, falls, cognitive impairment and dementia, corticospinal findings, urinary incontinence and pseudobulbar palsy. This article intends to provide physicians with an insight on the practical issues of VP, a disease potentially confounded with vascular dementia, idiopathic Parkinson's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies and other secondary causes of Parkinsonism.

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.