SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Voxel-wise meta-analysis of structural changes in gray matter of Parkinson's disease patients with mild cognitive impairment.

Braz J Med Biol Res · 2020-05-18

DOI: 10.1590/1414-431x20209275PMID: 32428131

Open accessMeta-Analysis; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Evidence from previous voxel-based morphometry (VBM) studies indicates that widespread brain regions are involved in Parkinson's disease with mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI). However, the spatial localization reported for gray matter (GM) abnormalities is heterogeneous. The aim of the present study was to quantitatively integrate studies on GM abnormalities observed in PD-MCI in order to determine whether a pattern exists. Eligible whole-brain VBM studies were identified by a systematic search of articles in PubMed and EMBASE databases spanning from 1995 to January 1, 2019. A meta-analysis was performed to investigate regional GM abnormalities in PD-MCI. The anisotropic effect size version of seed-based d mapping (AES-SDM) meta-analysis was conducted to explore the GMV differences of PD-MCI compared with PD patients with normal cognitive function (PD-NC). A total of 12 studies comprising 243 PD-MCI patients and 326 PD-NC were included in the meta-analysis. PD-MCI patients showed a robust GM decrease in the left insula and left superior temporal gyrus. Moreover, meta-regression analysis demonstrated that age, PD duration and stage, and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale III and Mini-Mental State Examination scores might be partly correlated with the GM abnormalities observed in PD-MCI patients. The convergent findings of this quantitative meta-analysis revealed a characteristic neuroanatomical pattern in PD-MCI. The findings provide some evidence that MCI in PD may result in the breakdown of the insula and temporal gyrus, which may serve as specific regions of interest for further investigations.

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.