4.5 Article

Cardiac parasympathetic dysfunction concurrent with cardiac sympathetic denervation in Parkinson's disease

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES
卷 276, 期 1-2, 页码 79-83

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2008.09.005

关键词

Parkinson's disease; I-123-meta-iodobenzylguanidine; Coefficient variation of RR intervals; Parasympathetic dysfunction; Orthostatic hypotension

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We aimed to characterize the relationship between cardiac sympathetic and parasympathetic dysfunction employing cardiac I-123-meta-iodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) uptake and other autonomic function parameters in Parkinson's disease (PD). 79 PD patients were studied. We performed I-123-MIBG myocardial scintigraphy to assess the extent of cardiac sympathetic denervation. Electrocardiogram readings at rest and postural change in blood pressure were also examined. Coefficient variation of RR intervals (CVR-R) Was used as ail index for cardiac parasympathetic activity. Cardiac I-123-MIBG uptake did not vary significantly among the Hoehn-Yahr (H-Y) stages. There was a significant correlation between cardiac I-123-MIBG uptake and CVR-R (early, r=0.457, p=0.001; late, r=0.442, p<0.001). While the correlation was present among the patients who had had the disease less than two years (early, r=0.558, p<0.001; late, r=0.530, p<0.001), the patients with the disease duration longer than two years did not have Such a significant correlation. Age, disease duration, corrected QT interval, or Postural blood pressure change did not correlate with cardiac I-123-MIBG uptake. Orthostatic hypotension was observed in 13 out of 72 subjects, and reduced CVR-R was a major determinant for the development of orthostatic hypotension. We conclude that cardiac parasympathetic dysfunction occurs concurrent with sympathetic denervation as revealed by I-123-MIBG myocardial scintigraphy in PD and contributes to the development of orthostatic hypotension. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据