SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · PPR

Detailed visual assessment of striatal dopaminergic depletion in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Unremarkable or not?

· 2020-03-31

DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-18582/v1

Check source for accessPreprintOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Abstract Background Dopamine transporter (DAT) imaging may enable clinicians to discriminate idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) from other parkinsonian disorders. However, a specific pattern of dopaminergic loss in DAT imaging of iNPH patients remains to be further elucidated. Methods In this preliminary study, 11 patients with iNPH in our hospital between March 2017 and February 2019 were finally enrolled. A diagnosis of iNPH was made according to the two established criteria. For visual analysis of DAT imaging, a striatum was divided into five domains. A semi-quantitative visual assessment was performed with a consensus between a nuclear medicine specialist and an experienced neurologist who were blinded to the clinical diagnosis. Results Striatal dopaminergic deficits were abnormal in 90.9% (10/11) of patients with iNPH. The degree of dopaminergic reduction was mild and heterogeneous. However, a tendency of preferential striatal DAT loss in the caudate nucleus (90.9%, 10/11) than in the putamen (72.7%, 8/11) was observed, whereas ventral portion (9.1%, 1/11) was relatively preserved. Conclusion Striatal dopaminergic depletion might be mild and heterogeneous in patients with iNPH. These dopaminergic deficits were more common in the caudate nucleus than in the putamen, suggesting a pattern different from other degenerative parkinsonian disorders.

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.