SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Infectious Microorganisms Seen as Etiologic Agents in Parkinson's Disease.

Life (Basel) · 2023-03-16

DOI: 10.3390/life13030805PMID: 36983960

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Infections represent a possible risk factor for parkinsonism and Parkinson's disease (PD) based on information from epidemiology and fundamental science. The risk is unclear for the majority of agents. Moreover, the latency between infection and PD seems to be very varied and often lengthy. In this review, the evidence supporting the potential involvement of infectious microorganisms in the development of Parkinson's disease is examined. Consequently, it is crucial to determine the cause and give additional treatment accordingly. Infection is an intriguing suggestion regarding the cause of Parkinson's disease. These findings demonstrate that persistent infection with viral and bacterial microorganisms might be a cause of Parkinson's disease. As an initiating factor, infection may generate a spectrum of gut microbiota dysbiosis, engagement of glial tissues, neuroinflammation, and alpha-synuclein accumulation, all of which may trigger and worsen the onset in Parkinson's disease also contribute to its progression. Still uncertain is the primary etiology of PD with infection. The possible pathophysiology of PD infection remains a matter of debate. Furthermore, additional study is required to determine if PD patients develop the disease due to infectious microorganisms or solely since they are more sensitive to infectious causes.

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.