SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Inner retinal thinning as a biomarker for cognitive impairment in de novo Parkinson's disease.

Sci Rep · 2019-08-14

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-48388-7PMID: 31413302

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

We investigated the association between retinal changes measured using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and diverse clinical grading scales in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Seventy-four eyes of 74 patients with de novo PD and 53 eyes of age-matched control subjects were included. The thickness of the peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (pRNFL) and macular ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (mGCIPL) were measured. We analyzed the correlations between the clinical PD grading scales and OCT parameters, and between the OCT parameters and volumetric data in the cerebral cortical and subcortical structures. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated for diagnosing cognitive impairment in patients with PD. Statistically significant reductions in the thickness of average, temporal, and inferior pRNFL and overall mGCIPL were observed in patients with PD. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment score was significantly associated with mGCIPL thinning. The AUC of the mGCIPL parameters for diagnosing cognitive impairment in patients with PD ranged from 0.651 to 0.760. Moreover, thinning of the mGCIPL was significantly associated with the volumetric parameters of associated brain structures. Our findings highlight the clinical implications of OCT measurements as a potential biomarker for early detection of cognitive impairment in patients with 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.