SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Levodopa responsiveness and white matter alterations in Parkinson's disease: A DTI-based study and brain network analysis: A cross-sectional study.

Brain Behav · 2022-11-24

DOI: 10.1002/brb3.2825PMID: 36423257

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

BackgroundPatients with Parkinson's disease (PD) present various responsiveness to levodopa, but the cause of such differences in levodopa responsiveness is unclear. Previous studies related the damage of brain white matter (WM) to levodopa responsiveness in PD patients, but no study investigated the relationship between the structural brain network change in PD patients and their levodopa responsiveness.MethodsPD patients were recruited and evaluated using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). Each patient received a diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) scan and an acute levodopa challenge test. The improvement rate of UPDRS-III was calculated. PD patients were grouped into irresponsive group (improvement rate ResultsFifty-four PD patients were included. TBSS identified significant differences in fractional anisotropy (FA) values in the corpus callosum and other regions of the brain. DT and ROI analysis of the corpus callosum found a significant difference in FA between the two groups. Graph theory analysis showed statistical differences in global efficiency, local efficiency, and characteristic path length.ConclusionPD patients with poor responsiveness to levodopa had WM damage in multiple brain areas, especially the corpus callosum, which might cause disruption of information integration of the structural brain network.

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.