SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Appendectomy and risk of Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Front Neurol · 2025-07-21

DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1619236PMID: 40761643

Open accessSystematic Review; systematic-review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

IntroductionBraak's hypothesis suggests that α-synuclein may enter the central nervous system through the enteric nervous system and contribute to the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease (PD). The appendix, enriched in α-synuclein, has been proposed as a possible entry point in PD pathogenesis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between appendectomy and PD risk using newly available data.MethodsA literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase through September 10, 2024, to identify studies on appendectomy and PD risk. Two independent reviewers screened and assessed articles for eligibility with a third reviewer involved in cases of disagreement. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data for meta-analysis were pooled using a random-effects model and analyzed in Review Manager 5.4. Meta-regression, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsNine studies met inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis indicated no significant association between appendectomy and PD risk (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.90-1.12, p = 0.89). Subgroup analyses showed similar findings. Sensitivity analyses did not change the estimate.ConclusionThis analysis suggests no association between appendectomy and PD risk.

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.