Reconsidering brain MRI in apparently classical Parkinson's disease: one-time structural imaging for every patient?

IF 2.4 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Roderick P P W M Maas, Huiberdina L Koek, Frederick J A Meijer, Bastiaan R Bloem
{"title":"Reconsidering brain MRI in apparently classical Parkinson's disease: one-time structural imaging for every patient?","authors":"Roderick P P W M Maas, Huiberdina L Koek, Frederick J A Meijer, Bastiaan R Bloem","doi":"10.1136/pn-2025-004529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Expert opinion, based on a careful medical history and detailed neurological examination, remains the gold standard to diagnose Parkinson's disease (PD). Neuroimaging is deemed unnecessary in those presenting with a characteristic phenotype. We encountered two patients in whom our expert clinical opinion, namely not to scan, was 'overruled' because structural brain imaging had been performed elsewhere. The MR scans unexpectedly showed an underlying cause for the parkinsonian symptoms, with unequivocal therapeutic implications. Neither patient had any unambiguous non-motor symptoms. Stimulated by these two cases, we present a nuanced view on the possible indications for brain MRI in people with apparently classical motor PD. We propose to count the absence of any unambiguous non-motor symptoms as a double (rather than single) red flag, thus requiring this to be countered by two supportive signs, and suggest lowering the threshold for brain scanning in such patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":39343,"journal":{"name":"PRACTICAL NEUROLOGY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PRACTICAL NEUROLOGY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/pn-2025-004529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Expert opinion, based on a careful medical history and detailed neurological examination, remains the gold standard to diagnose Parkinson's disease (PD). Neuroimaging is deemed unnecessary in those presenting with a characteristic phenotype. We encountered two patients in whom our expert clinical opinion, namely not to scan, was 'overruled' because structural brain imaging had been performed elsewhere. The MR scans unexpectedly showed an underlying cause for the parkinsonian symptoms, with unequivocal therapeutic implications. Neither patient had any unambiguous non-motor symptoms. Stimulated by these two cases, we present a nuanced view on the possible indications for brain MRI in people with apparently classical motor PD. We propose to count the absence of any unambiguous non-motor symptoms as a double (rather than single) red flag, thus requiring this to be countered by two supportive signs, and suggest lowering the threshold for brain scanning in such patients.

重新考虑典型帕金森病的脑MRI:对每个患者进行一次性结构成像?
专家的意见,基于仔细的病史和详细的神经学检查,仍然是诊断帕金森病(PD)的金标准。对于那些表现出特征性表型的患者,神经影像学被认为是不必要的。我们遇到了两个病人,我们的专家临床意见,即不扫描,被“否决”,因为结构脑成像已经在其他地方进行了。磁共振扫描出人意料地显示了帕金森症状的潜在原因,具有明确的治疗意义。两名患者均无明确的非运动症状。在这两个病例的刺激下,我们提出了一种微妙的观点,即对典型运动PD患者进行脑MRI的可能适应症。我们建议将没有任何明确的非运动症状视为双重(而不是单一)危险信号,因此需要两个支持性迹象来应对,并建议降低此类患者的脑部扫描阈值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PRACTICAL NEUROLOGY
PRACTICAL NEUROLOGY Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
3.60%
发文量
113
期刊介绍: The essential point of Practical Neurology is that it is practical in the sense of being useful for everyone who sees neurological patients and who wants to keep up to date, and safe, in managing them. In other words this is a journal for jobbing neurologists - which most of us are for at least part of our time - who plough through the tension headaches and funny turns week in and week out. Primary research literature potentially relevant to routine clinical practice is far too much for any neurologist to read, let alone understand, critically appraise and assimilate. Therefore, if research is to influence clinical practice appropriately and quickly it has to be digested and provided to neurologists in an informative and convenient way.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信