SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

A systematic review and meta-analysis on glymphatic flow dysfunction in Parkinson's disease and Parkinsonism spectrum.

NPJ Parkinsons Dis · 2025-10-23

DOI: 10.1038/s41531-025-01151-4PMID: 41131042

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized evidence of glymphatic dysfunction in Parkinson's disease (PD) and related Parkinsonian syndromes using the diffusion tensor imaging along the perivascular space (DTI-ALPS) index. Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, 28 studies published up to May 12, 2025, were included. The primary meta-analysis of 21 studies (1678 patients with PD and 1088 HCs) demonstrated a significant reduction in the DTI-ALPS index in patients with PD (Cohen's d = -0.57; 95% CI: -0.67 to -0.47; p < 0.001), indicating moderate glymphatic dysfunction. This impairment was significantly associated with clinical progression, including longer disease duration (β = -0.08, p = 0.005) and higher Hoehn and Yahr (H-Y) stages (β = -0.18, p = 0.057). This association was particularly strong in patients with early-stage PD (H-Y < 2.5). Phenotypic analyses revealed a gradient of dysfunction, with the most severe impairment found in patients with PD with dementia (Glass's Δ = -1.04) and atypical Parkinsonian syndromes (Δ = -1.01). Technical subgroup analyses showed consistent findings, with region-of-interest size significantly moderating effect size (p = 0.04). The methodological quality of the included studies was high, with no evidence of publication bias. The methodological quality was high, with no evidence of publication bias (p ≥ 0.88). These findings underscore the progressive glymphatic decline with PD severity and duration, independent of age or cognition, and highlight distinct impairment patterns across different clinical phenotypes.

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.