SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Combination of Multifocal Electroretinogram and Spectral-Domain OCT Can Increase Diagnostic Efficacy of Parkinson's Disease.

Parkinsons Dis · 2018-03-01

DOI: 10.1155/2018/4163239PMID: 29755728

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

BackgroundThe retinal changes have been identified in morphology and function in Parkinson's disease (PD). However, the controversial results suggest that it is incredible that only using a single method for testing retinal change to evaluate Parkinson's disease. The aim of this study was to assess retinal changes and increase the diagnostic efficacy of Parkinson's disease with a combination of multifocal electroretinogram (mf-ERG) and spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) examinations.MethodFifty-three PD patients and forty-one healthy controls were enrolled. Subjects were assessed for retinal function using mf-ERG and retinal structure using SD-OCT.ResultsThe PD patients had a significantly decreased amplitude density of P1 and a delayed implicit time of P1 in some regions. The macular retinal thickness, macular volume, and average RNFL thickness were decreased in PD. The AUC of a single parameter of either retinal function or structure was low. Both of them were higher in diagnostic value to discriminate PD patients.ConclusionThe amplitude density of P1 combined with macular volume can get a high diagnostic efficacy to discriminate between participants with or without PD. It indicates that a combination of mf-ERG and SD-OCT provides a good clinical biomarker for diagnosis of PD.

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.