Investigation of oropharyngeal swallowing and swallowing-breathing coordination in patients with Parkinsonian syndromes. An electrokinesiographic approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 429 ◽  
pp. 119564
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Cosentino ◽  
Sebastiano Arceri ◽  
Massimiliano Todisco ◽  
Cristina Tassorelli ◽  
Enrico Alfonsi
Author(s):  
Beatrice Heim ◽  
Florian Krismer ◽  
Klaus Seppi

AbstractDifferential diagnosis of parkinsonian syndromes is considered one of the most challenging in neurology. Quantitative MR planimetric measurements were reported to discriminate between progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and non-PSP-parkinsonism. Several studies have used midbrain to pons ratio (M/P) and the Magnetic Resonance Parkinsonism Index (MRPI) in distinguishing PSP patients from those with Parkinson's disease. The current meta-analysis aimed to compare the performance of these measures in discriminating PSP from multiple system atrophy (MSA). A systematic MEDLINE review identified 59 out of 2984 studies allowing a calculation of sensitivity and specificity using the MRPI or M/P. Meta-analyses of results were carried out using random effects modelling. To assess study quality and risk of bias, the QUADAS-2 tool was used. Eight studies were suitable for analysis. The meta‐analysis showed a pooled sensitivity and specificity for the MRPI of PSP versus MSA of 79.2% (95% CI 72.7–84.4%) and 91.2% (95% CI 79.5–96.5%), and 84.1% (95% CI 77.2–89.2%) and 89.2% (95% CI 81.8–93.8%), respectively, for the M/P. The QUADAS-2 toolbox revealed a high risk of bias regarding the methodological quality of patient selection and index test, as all patients were seen in a specialized outpatient department without avoiding case control design and no predefined threshold was given regarding MRPI or M/P cut-offs. Planimetric brainstem measurements, in special the MRPI and M/P, yield high diagnostic accuracy for the discrimination of PSP from MSA. However, there is an urgent need for well-designed, prospective validation studies to ameliorate the concerns regarding the risk of bias.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Iwabuchi ◽  
Tadaki Nakahara ◽  
Masashi Kameyama ◽  
Yohji Matsusaka ◽  
Yasuhiro Minami ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ekawat Vichayanrat ◽  
Claire Hentzen ◽  
Amit Batla ◽  
Sara Simeoni ◽  
Valeria Iodice ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Sonja Schönecker ◽  
Matthias Brendel ◽  
Carla Palleis ◽  
Leonie Beyer ◽  
Günter U. Höglinger ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 1189-1212 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Williams ◽  
Irene Litvan

1997 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 302-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nir Giladi ◽  
Richard Kao ◽  
Stanley Fahn

2021 ◽  
Vol 429 ◽  
pp. 119608
Author(s):  
Hakim Si Ahmed ◽  
Smail Daoudi

2022 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Amina Nasri ◽  
Ikram Sghaier ◽  
Alya Gharbi ◽  
Saloua Mrabet ◽  
Mouna Ben Djebara ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document