Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
ObjectivesTo conduct brainstem MRI shape analysis across neurodegenerative parkinsonisms and control subjects (CS), along with its association with clinical and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) correlates.MethodologyWe collected demographic and clinical variables, performed planimetric and shape MRI analyses, and determined CSF neurofilament-light chain (NfL) levels in 84 participants: 11 CS, 12 with Parkinson's disease (PD), 26 with multiple system atrophy (MSA), 21 with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), and 14 with corticobasal degeneration (CBD).ResultsMSA featured the most extensive and significant brainstem shape narrowing (that is, atrophy), mostly in the pons. CBD presented local atrophy in several small areas in the pons and midbrain compared to PD and CS. PSP presented local atrophy in small areas in the posterior and upper midbrain as well as the rostral pons compared to MSA. Our findings of planimetric MRI measurements and CSF NfL levels replicated those from previous literature. Brainstem shape atrophy correlated with worse motor state in all parkinsonisms and with higher NfL levels in MSA, PSP, and PD.ConclusionAtypical parkinsonisms present different brainstem shape patterns which correlate with clinical severity and neuronal degeneration. In MSA, shape analysis could be further explored as a potential diagnostic biomarker. By contrast, shape analysis appears to have a rather limited discriminant value in PSP.Key points• Atypical parkinsonisms present different brainstem shape patterns. • Shape patterns correlate with clinical severity and neuronal degeneration. • In MSA, shape analysis could be further explored as a potential diagnostic biomarker.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.