SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Resting-state functional connectivity of the occipital cortex in different subtypes of Parkinson's disease.

CNS Neurosci Ther · 2024-08-01

DOI: 10.1111/cns.14915PMID: 39187974

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

AimsTo examine whether functional connectivity (FC) of the occipital gyrus differs between patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) motor subtypes and healthy controls (HCs).MethodsWe enrolled 30 PD patients exhibiting tremor dominance (TD), 43 PD patients with postural instability and gait disturbance (PIGD), and 42 HCs. The occipital gyrus was partitioned into six areas of interest, as seed points, via the Anatomical Automatic Labeling template to compare the FC of the three groups and analyze the relationship of FC with clinical scales.ResultsCompared with the PIGD group, the TD group showed increased FC between the left superior occipital gyrus (SOG.L) and right median cingulate and paracingulate gyri (DCG.R)/right paracentral lobule/bilateral inferior parietal, but supramarginal and angular gyri; the left middle occipital gyrus (MOG.L) and left posterior cingulate gyrus (PCG.L); the MOG.R and SOG.L/right calcarine fissure and surrounding cortex/DCG.R/PCG.L/right cuneus; the left inferior occipital gyrus (IOG.L) and right caudate nucleus; and the IOG.R and PCG.L.ConclusionDifferentiated FC between the occipital gyrus and other brain areas within the PD motor subtypes, which may serve as neural markers to distinguish between patients with TD and PIGD PD.

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.