SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Clinical features, MRI, and 18F-FDG-PET in differential diagnosis of Parkinson disease from multiple system atrophy.

Brain Behav · 2020-09-17

DOI: 10.1002/brb3.1827PMID: 32940411

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

ObjectiveThis study aimed to differentiate the variations in the clinical characteristics, MRI irregularity, and glucose metabolism on 18 F-FDG-PET for the differential diagnosis of Parkinson's Disease (PD), MSA with predominant Parkinsonism (MSA-P), and MSA with predominant cerebellar features (MSA-C).MethodsThirty PD patients, 22 MSA-P patients, and 28 MSA-C patients received an MRI and 20 PD patients, 11 MSA-P patients, and 13 MSA-C patients received 18 F-FDG-PET.ResultsFirstly, we found that the clinical data presented a tremor at rest, bradykinesia, and postural instability that was predominated in PD (100%), MSA-P (86.4%), and MSA-C (53.6%) patients, respectively. Then, we used MRI analyses and found that putamina atrophy and hyperintensive rim (T2 WI) were characteristic features in MSA-P and cerebellar atrophy, the "hot cross bun" sign and signal rise in the middle cerebellar peduncle were more obvious in MSA-C. To further explore the distinctions among the 3 diseases, we also used 18F-FDG-PET technology for our examination and found a decrease in glucose metabolism in the parietal area for Parkinson's Disease (PD), in the bilateral putamen for MSA-P, and in the bilateral cerebellum for MSA-C.ConclusionThis study identified the distinctive features of the clinic symptoms, MRI irregularity, and glucose metabolism on 18 F-FDG-PET, which provided a new basis for the differential diagnosis of Parkinson's Disease (PD), MSA with predominant Parkinsonism (MSA-P), and MSA with predominant cerebellar features (MSA-C).

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.