| Literature DB >> 24655437 |
Kristina Laučkaitė1, Daiva Rastenytė, Danguolė Šurkienė, Birutė Vaidelytė, Gabrielė Dambrauskaitė, Andrius Sakalauskas, Antanas Vaitkus, Rymantė Gleiznienė.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Essential tremor (ET) and Parkinson's disease (PD) are considered distinct disorders. The aim of the study was to look for a link or any distinguishing features by transcranial sonography (TCS), together with the clinical examination findings in a group of patients with overlapping phenotype of ET and PD (ET-PD).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24655437 PMCID: PMC3998107 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2377-14-54
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Neurol ISSN: 1471-2377 Impact factor: 2.474
The detailed demographic and clinical characteristics of every ET-PD patient
| 1. | 43 | Yes | H + A | D | Yes | Yes | DA, amantadine 200 mg, propranolol 80 mg |
| 2. | 6 | Yes | H + A | D | No | No | DA, clorazepate 10 mg |
| 3. | 21 | No | A + L | B | No | Yes | Propranolol 120 mg, clonazepam 2 mg |
| 4. | 3.5 | Yes | H + A | S | No | Yes | L-Dopa, pregabaline 75 mg |
| 5. | 10 | No | H + A | D | No | Yes | DA, bromazepam 1.5 mg, vit. E |
| 6. | 30 | Yes | H + A | D | No | No | L-Dopa |
| 7. | 6 | No | H + V + A | D | Yes | Yes | L-Dopa, DA, propranolol 80 mg, citalopram, |
| clonazepam 0.25 mg | |||||||
| 8. | 10 | Yes | A + L | B | Yes | No | L-Dopa, propranolol 80 mg |
| 9. | 11 | No | H + A + L | B | Yes | Yes | L-Dopa, DA, rasagiline 1 mg |
| 10. | 15 | No | A | D | No | No | Sertraline, zolpidem |
| 11. | 3 | No | A | S | No | Yes | Propranolol 40 mg |
| 12. | 45 | Yes | A | S | No | Yes | L-Dopa, DA |
| 13. | 3 | Yes | H + V + A | D | No | Yes | Clonazepam 2 mg, tiapride 150 mg |
| 14. | 1.5 | Yes | H + A | S | No | Yes | Paroxetine, clonazepam 0.25 mg, vit. E, coenzyme Q10 |
| 15. | 10 | No | A | B | No | No | Gabapentine 100 mg, vinpocetine 20 mg, piracetam 400 mg, vit. E |
Demographic and clinical characteristics of ET-PD patients in comparison to ET-only, PD-only patients and controls
| Age, y | 69 ± 9.6 | 63.9 ± 14.4 | 64.4 ± 11.2 | NS | 61.7 ± 12.4 | NS |
| Gender (male) | 6 (40) | 39 (33.6) | 75 (53.2) | 0.007 | 56 (55.4) | 0.004 |
| Sympt. duration y | 6 (3-15) | 5 (1-10) | 3 (1-6) | 0.003a | N/A | N/A |
| Family history + | 8 (53.3) | 35 (31.3) | 23 (17) | 0.005 | 4 (4.3) | <0.001 |
| Toxic exposure | 3 (20) | 19 (16.4) | 23 (16.3) | NS | 16 (15.8) | NS |
| Living in rural | 4 (26.7) | 19 (16.4) | 29 (20.6) | NS | 16 (15.8) | NS |
| Cogwheel sign | 4 (26.7) | 3 (2.6) | 129 (91.5) | <0.001 | 0 (0) | <0.001 |
| Pyramidal signs | 2 (13.3) | 3 (2.6) | 19 (13.5) | 0.009 | 10 (9.9) | 0.025 |
| H&Y stage | 2.6 ± 0.8 | N/A | 1.8 ± 0.8 | 0.012 | N/A | N/A |
| UPDRS part I | 1 (0-1) | 1 (0-3) | 3 (1-4) | NS | N/A | N/A |
| UPDRS part II | 5 (4-6) | 13 (12-13) | 11 (7-16) | NS | N/A | N/A |
| UPDRS part III | 5 (3-6) | 4 (1-6) | 14 (9-20) | 0.021b | N/A | N/A |
| HAD-Anxiety | 1 (1-8) | 6 (2-10) | 8 (5-11) | NS | 5 (3-8) | NS |
| HAD-Depression | 4 (4-7) | 4 (2-6) | 6 (4-9) | NS | 3 (1-7) | NS |
| SF36-PF | 53.3 ± 17.6 | 52.3 ± 31.8 | 45.9 ± 25.3 | NS | 70 ± 24.2 | 0.001c |
| SF36-RLPF | 16.7 ± 28.9 | 33.1 ± 29 | 33.3 ± 27 | NS | 50.2 ± 29.4 | 0.020d |
| SF36-RLEF | 33.3 ± 57.7 | 51.4 ± 30 | 40.8 ± 34.2 | NS | 59 ± 32.2 | NSe |
| SF36-EF | 43.3 ± 10.4 | 43.8 ± 24.8 | 44.5 ± 19.4 | NS | 58.8 ± 17.1 | 0.007f |
| SF36-EW | 66.7 ± 38.9 | 52.5 ± 26 | 53.7 ± 19.3 | NS | 64.7 ± 15.8 | NSg |
| SF36-SF | 58.3 ± 19.1 | 57.3 ± 31.5 | 53.8 ± 24.9 | NS | 75.7 ± 46.7 | 0.050h |
| SF36-P | 66.7 ± 18.8 | 65.7 ± 26.7 | 49.5 ± 30.7 | NS | 61.7 ± 28.2 | NS |
| SF36-GH | 28.3 ± 2.9 | 35 ± 19.4 | 31.1 ± 16.9 | NS | 49.1 ± 18.5 | <0.001i |
Values are presented as mean ± SD or median with IQR, and numbers (percentages). *- p values were counted comparing 3 groups of patients, #- p values were counted comparing 4 groups of subjects where available.
The post hoc multiple comparisons between the groups by Tukey HSD and LSD tests revealed significant differences:
a-ET-PD vs. PD-only p = 0.001, 95% CI 2.8-13.1, ET-only vs. PD-only p = 0.002, 95% CI 1.12-5.87; b-LSD test only PD vs. ET-only p = 0.009, 95% CI 2.32-15.61; ET-PD vs. ET-only p = 0.008, 95% CI 4.86-31.08; c-PD-only vs. control group p = 0.001, 95% CI 8.37-39.88; d-PD-only vs. control group p = 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-33.83; e-LSD test only, PD-only vs. control group p = 0.018, 95% CI 3.16-33.19; f-PD-only vs. control group p = 0.011, 95% CI 2.48-26.16; ET-only vs. control group p = 0.024, 95% CI 1.46-28.67; g-LSD test only, PD-only vs. controls p = 0.021, 95% CI 1.66-20.19; ET-only vs. controls p = 0.026, 95% CI 1.46-22.76; h-PD-only vs. control group p = 0.039, 95% CI 0.77-43.1; i-PD-only vs. controls p < 0.001, 95% CI 7.24-28.62; ET-only vs. controls p = 0.018, 95% CI 1.77-26.34; LSD test only, PD-only vs. ET-only p = 0.031, 95% CI 1.52-30.94.
Ultrasonographic (TCS) findings in the groups of patients and control subjects
| SNR cm2 | 0.22 ± 0.12 | 0.20 ± 0.11 | 0.27 ± 0.14 | <0.001a | 0.15 ± 0.09 | <0.001d |
| SNL cm2 | 0.27 ± 0.15 | 0.23 ± 0.14 | 0.31 ± 0.16 | 0.001b | 0.16 ± 0.09 | <0.001e |
| SNMax cm2 | 0.30 ± 0.16 | 0.24 ± 0.14 | 0.34 ± 0.16 | <0.001c | 0.18 ± 0.09 | <0.001f |
| SNMax ≥0.20 cm2 | 10 (66.7) | 49 (42.2) | 106 (75.2) | <0.001 | 18 (17.8) | <0.001 |
| SNMax ≥0.26 cm2 | 8 (53.3) | 38 (32.8) | 89 (63.1) | 11 (10.9) | ||
| V3 cm | 0.69 ± 0.31 | 0.58 ± 0.28 | 0.58 ± 0.27 | NS | 0.53 ± 0.25 | NSg |
| LVR cm | 1.81 ± 0.3 | 1.82 ± 0.26 | 1.78 ± 0.24 | NS | 1.79 ± 0.26 | NS |
| LVL cm | 1.78 ± 0.26 | 1.81 ± 0.3 | 1.75 ± 0.24 | NS | 1.74 ± 0.26 | NS |
| Raphe – or +/- | 5 (38.5) | 22 (20) | 51 (38.6) | 0.007 | 11 (13.1) | <0.001 |
| Caudate + | 0 (0) | 2 (1.7) | 2 (1.4) | NS | 0 (0) | NS |
| Lentiform + | 4 (26.7) | 20 (17.2) | 12 (8.5) | NS | 4 (4) | 0.006 |
| Thalamus + | 2 (13.3) | 10 (8.6) | 10 (7.1) | NS | 10 (9.9) | NS |
| Red nucleus + | 1 (6.7) | 20 (17.2) | 9 (6.4) | 0.008 | 19 (18.8) | 0.005 |
Values are presented as mean ± SD or numbers (percentages). *-p values were counted comparing 3 groups, #-p values were counted comparing 4 groups.
The post hoc multiple comparisons by Tukey HSD and LSD tests showed statistically significant differences between the latter groups:
a-ET-only vs. PD-only p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.03-0.11; b-ET-only vs. PD-only p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.03-0.12; c-ET-only vs. PD-only p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.04-0.13; d-ET-only vs. PD-only p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.03-0.11; ET-only vs. controls p = 0.032, 95% CI 0.003-0.09; PD-only vs. controls p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.07-0.16; e-ET-only vs. PD-only p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.03-0.12; ET-only vs. controls p = 0.03, 95% CI 0.02-0.12; PD-only vs. controls p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.1-0.2; f-ET-only vs. PD-only p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.04-0.13; ET-only vs. controls p = 0.003, 95% CI 0.02-0.12; PD-only vs. controls p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.1-0.2; by LSD only ET-PD vs. controls p = 0.019, 95% CI 0.02-0.17; g-LSD test only ET-PD vs. controls p = 0.042, 95% CI 0.005-0.303.
Figure 1Images of a patient with ET-PD-RLS, suggesting an alternative diagnosis of parkinsonism after paraclinical tests. A-cranial MRI, T2W, B-cranial CT, markedly hyperintensive signals bilaterally in the lentiform nucleus (white arrows), C-TCS, mesencephalic plane, moderate SN and red nucleus hyperechogenicity (white arrow), D-TCS, diencephalic plane, bilaterally markedly hyperechogenic lentiform nuclei (white arrows).