| Literature DB >> 29440768 |
Xiao-Yan Deng1,2, Li Wang3, Ting-Ting Yang1, Rui Li1, Gang Yu4.
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a common neurodegenerative disease characterized by severe, selective loss of pigmented neurons in the substantial nigra (SN). Previous studies have indicated that such loss could be detected by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). Here, we try to consolidate current DTI data to both quantitatively determine the imaging changes in SN, as well as explore the potential use of DTI for PD diagnosis. Fourteen research articles are included in this meta-analysis, each obtained by searching PubMed, EMBASE, or Cochrane library database dated until July 2017. The articles contain 14 trials with 298 total PD patients and 283 healthy controls (HCs). The results show not only significantly lower FA values of SN in PD compared to that of HCs (WMD = -0.02, 95% CI = [-0.03, -0.02], p < 0.00001), but also a significantly higher MD in PD compared to HCs (WMD = 0.05, 95% CI = [0.03, 0.07], P < 0.0001). This indicates that the sharp difference detected between PD patients and HCs can be detected by DTI. By further analyzing the heterogeneity, we found that FA measurement of SN could be potentially used as a surrogate, noninvasive diagnostic marker toward PD diagnosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29440768 PMCID: PMC5811437 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-20076-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Flow diagram of study selection procedure.
Characteristics of included studies.
| Author year | No.of PD/ controls | Country | Scanner | Field-str | Head coil | DTI dir | ROI placement | statistic significance | M-corr. | Eddy cur. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Li[ | 23/23 | China | Philips | 3.0 T | 8 | 31 | manual | FA | √ | √ |
| Perea[ | 12/13 | USA | Allegra | 3.0 T | ? | 36 | manual | none | √ | √ |
| Schwarz[ | 32/27 | UK | Philips | 3.0 T | 8 | 32 | manual | MD | √ | √ |
| Scherfler[ | 16/14 | Austrilia | Siemens | 1.5 T | 8 | 12 | automatical | FA, MD | ? | ? |
| Du[ | 16/16 | USA | Siemens | 3.0 T | 8 | 42 | Semi–Manual | FA | √ | √ |
| Prakash[ | 11/12 | Singapore | Philips | 3.0 T | ? | 16 | manual | FA, MD | ? | ? |
| Skorpil[ | 13/13 | Sweden | Philips | 1.5 T | 16 | 32 | manual | FA | √ | √ |
| Rolheiser[ | 14/14 | Canada | General Electrics | 1.5 T | 8 | 31 | manual | FA | √ | √ |
| Menke[ | 10/10 | UK | Siemens | 3.0 T | 12 | 60 | Semi–Manual | none | √ | √ |
| Péran[ | 30/22 | Italy | Siemens | 3.0 T | ? | 30 | manual | FA | √ | √ |
| Gattellaro[ | 10/10 | Italy | Siemens | 1.5 T | 4 | 12 | manual | MD | ? | ? |
| Chan[ | 73/78 | singapore | Siemens | 1.5 T | ? | 12 | manual | FA | √ | √ |
| Langley[ | 20/17 | USA | Siemens | 3.0 T | 12 | 64 | manual | none | ? | √ |
| Loane[ | 18/14 | UK | Siemens | 3.0 T | 32 | 64 | manual | none | √ | √ |
Year: the year of the article published; No. of PD/controls: the number of PD patients compare to controls in article; Country: the country of the study carried out; Field-str: Field-strength of magnet; Head coil: number of channels within the receiver headcoil; DTI dir: Number of DTI diffusion directions for data acquisition; ROI placement: the method of ROI placement; statistic significance: If the FA or MD have statistic difference; M-corr: Motion correction used; Eddy cur: Eddy current correction used; “√” means a positive indicator; “?” means unclear.
Assessment of study quality.
| Reference | Quality Indications of Newcastle-Ottawa Scale | Total | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | ||
| Li 2015[ | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Perea 2013[ | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| Schwarz 2013[ | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| Scherfler 2013[ | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| Du 2011[ | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Prakash 2012[ | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| Skorpil 2012[ | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| Rolheiser 2011[ | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| Menke 2010[ | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Péran 2010[ | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| Gattellaro 2009[ | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| Chan 2007[ | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| Langley 2016[ | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| Loane 2016[ | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
A. Adequate definition of Case; B. Representativeness of cases; C. Selection of control; D. Definition of control; E. Control for important factor or additional factor; F. Exposure assessment; G. Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls; H. Nonresponse rate.
Figure 2Forrest plot of PD induced nigral FA changes. IV, inverse variance; CI, confidence interval; Fixed, fixed-effect model.
Figure 3Forrest plot of PD induced nigral MD changes. Random, random-effect model.
Figure 4Forrest plot of subgroup analysis of PD induced nigral FA changes.
Figure 5Forrest plot of subgroup analysis of PD induced nigral MD changes.
Figure 6Funnel plot of PD induced nigral FA changes. SE, standard error; MD, mean differences.
Figure 7Funnel plot of PD induced nigral MD changes.