Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundPutaminal diffusivity in brain magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is increased in patients with the parkinsonian variant of multiple system atrophy (MSA-P) compared to Parkinson disease (PD) patients.PurposeWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of DWI to distinguish MSA-P from PD.MethodsStudies on DWI were identified through a systematic PubMed and Clarivate Analytics® Web of Science® Core Collection search. Papers were selected based on stringent inclusion criteria; minimum requirement was the inclusion of MSA-P and PD patients and documented true positive, true negative, false positive and false negative rates or overall sample size and reported sensitivity and specificity. Meta-analysis was performed using the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristics curve approach.ResultsThe database search yielded 1678 results of which 9 studies were deemed relevant. Diagnostic accuracy of putaminal diffusivity measurements were reported in all of these 9 studies, whereas results of other regions of interest were only reported irregularly. Therefore, a meta-analysis could only be performed for putaminal diffusivity measurements: 127 patients with MSA-P, 262 patients with PD and 70 healthy controls were included in the quantitative synthesis. The meta-analysis showed an overall sensitivity of 90% (95% confidence interval (CI): 76.7%-95.8%) and an overall specificity of 93% (95% CI: 80.0%-97.7%) to distinguish MSA-P from PD based on putaminal diffusivity.ConclusionPutaminal diffusivity yields high sensitivity and specificity to distinguish clinically diagnosed patients with MSA-P from PD. The confidence intervals indicate substantial variability. Further multicenter studies with harmonized protocols are warranted particularly in early disease stages when clinical diagnosis is less certain.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.