SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Structural Volumetric Alterations in Parkinson's Disease With Mild Cognitive Impairment.

Brain Behav · 2026-05-01

DOI: 10.1002/brb3.71410PMID: 42043968

Open accessMeta-Analysis; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundParkinson's disease with mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI) is a critical dementia prodrome, but its structural neuropathology remains incompletely defined. While hippocampal atrophy is established, volumetric changes in other subcortical structures are poorly characterized.ObjectiveTo perform the first comprehensive meta-analysis quantifying gray matter volume alterations across six subcortical regions in PD-MCI.MethodsA systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane (inception-June 2025) for studies reporting MRI volumetric data comparing PD-MCI and cognitively normal PD (PD-NC) was done. Random-effects models calculated pooled weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity (I2), publication bias, sensitivity analyses, and meta-regression were assessed.ResultsPD-MCI showed significant bilateral atrophy versus PD-NC in the hippocampus (total WMD = -0.65 cm3), thalamus, putamen, and amygdala, alongside right-lateralized globus pallidus atrophy (WMD = -0.08 cm3). Bilateral caudate nuclei volumes were preserved. Sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness. Meta-regression identified segmentation tools and country as sources of left hippocampal heterogeneity (p ConclusionPD-MCI exhibits a distinct subcortical atrophy signature involving limbic-striato-thalamic networks, with right globus pallidus atrophy as a novel lateralized biomarker. Network-based imaging paradigms are advocated, requiring standardized protocols and longitudinal validation.Systematic review registrationIdentifier PROSPERO (CRD420251051275).

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.