Optical Coherence Tomography as a Biomarker in the Differential Diagnosis between Parkinson’s Disease and Atypical Parkinsonian Syndromes: A Narrative Review
Rattachement africain : gr. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Parkinsonism may be a clinical manifestation of a wide range of disease entities, and still poses a great diagnostic challenge. In an attempt to provide further insight into the differential diagnosis of PD versus progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), multiple system atrophy (MSA), corticobasal degeneration (CBD), and Lewy body dementia (LBD), several biomarkers have been investigated, yielding inconclusive results, OCT being among them. The present review aims to explore the potential diagnostic value of evaluating retinal parameters through OCT implementation among patients presenting with a Parkinsonian syndrome, with an emphasis on effective differentiation between distinct syndromes. Having reviewed all the available literature published within the last decade, neurodegeneration seems to be paralleled with degeneration and alterations of the retina that may be quantified by OCT. Specific patterns of structural changes within the retina may provide valuable information on the underlying pathology, thus highlighting the role of OCT as a diagnostic tool within this group of patients. Although still not utilized in clinical practice, OCT, if further explored and validated, may significantly enhance overall Parkinsonism care.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Optical Coherence Tomography as a Biomarker in the Differential Diagnosis between Parkinson’s Disease and Atypical Parkinsonian Syndromes: A Narrative Review
- Date Crossref
- 15/03/2024
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.