Atormac
Neurology India
menu-bar5 Open access journal indexed with Index Medicus
  Users online: 1036  
 Home | Login 
About Editorial board Articlesmenu-bullet NSI Publicationsmenu-bullet Search Instructions Online Submission Subscribe Videos Etcetera Contact
  Navigate Here 
 Search
 
  
 Resource Links
  »  Similar in PUBMED
 »  Search Pubmed for
 »  Search in Google Scholar for
 »Related articles
  »  Article in PDF (608 KB)
  »  Citation Manager
  »  Access Statistics
  »  Reader Comments
  »  Email Alert *
  »  Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this Article
 »  Abstract
 » Introduction
 »  Materials and Me...
 » Results
 » Discussion
 »  References
 »  Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1915    
    Printed55    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded77    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal

 


 
Table of Contents    
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 64  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 633-639

Correlation between qualitative balance indices, dynamic posturography and structural brain imaging in patients with progressive supranuclear palsy and its subtypes


1 Department of Neurology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
2 Department of Neurological Rehabilitation, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
3 Department of Neuroimaging and Interventional Radiology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Date of Web Publication5-Jul-2016

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Pramod Kumar Pal
Department of Neurology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Hosur Road, Bengaluru - 560 029, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.185417

Rights and Permissions

 » Abstract 

Objectives: To compare the clinical, balance, and radiological profile of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) of Richardson type (PSP-R) and Parkinsonian type (PSP-P).
Materials and Methods: Twenty-nine patients with PSP (PSP-R: 17, PSP-P: 12) satisfying the probable/possible National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke-PSP criteria were recruited and assessed with Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale-III, PSP rating scale (PSPRS), Berg balance scale (BBS), Tinetti performance-oriented mobility assessment gait and total (TPG and TPT) score, dynamic posturography (DP), and magnetic resonance imaging. Data were compared with 30 age- and gender-matched healthy controls.
Results: The mean ages of PSP-R, PSP-P, and controls were comparable (62.5 ± 6.6, 59 ± 8.9, and 59.8 ± 7.6 years). The PSP group had significantly poor DP scores and more radiological abnormalities than controls. The PSPRS, TPG, and TPT scores were significantly more impaired in PSP-R compared to PSP-P (P = 0.045, P = 0.031, and P = 0.037, respectively). In DP, the limits of overall stability were most significant (P < 0.001) and PSP-R had lower scores. PSP-R compared to PSP-P had more often “Humming Bird” sign (P < 0.001), “Morning Glory” sign (P < 0.008), and generalized cortical atrophy (P < 0.001). The area of midbrain (P < 0.002) and midbrain/pons ratio (P < 0.013) was significantly lower in PSP-R. In PSP-P, the overall balance index significantly correlated with BBS, TPG, and TPT (r = −0.79, P = 0.002; r = −0.772, P = 0.003; and r = −0.688, P = 0.013) and the midbrain axial anterior–posterior diameter significantly correlated with the TPG and TPT (r = 0.74, P = 0.01; r = 0.66, P = 0.018).
Conclusions: While balance and radiological abnormalities were more severe in PSP-R, the qualitative and quantitative measurements of severity of balance in PSP-P rather than PSP-R was a better reflection of the pathology of the midbrain.


Keywords: Balance; Berg balance scale; dynamic posturography; imaging; magnetic resonance imaging; progressive supranuclear palsy; Richardson's type; Tinetti performance-oriented mobility assessment scale


How to cite this article:
Pasha SA, Yadav R, Ganeshan M, Saini J, Gupta A, Sandhya M, Pal PK. Correlation between qualitative balance indices, dynamic posturography and structural brain imaging in patients with progressive supranuclear palsy and its subtypes. Neurol India 2016;64:633-9

How to cite this URL:
Pasha SA, Yadav R, Ganeshan M, Saini J, Gupta A, Sandhya M, Pal PK. Correlation between qualitative balance indices, dynamic posturography and structural brain imaging in patients with progressive supranuclear palsy and its subtypes. Neurol India [serial online] 2016 [cited 2019 Nov 22];64:633-9. Available from: http://www.neurologyindia.com/text.asp?2016/64/4/633/185417



 » Introduction Top


Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is the second most common neurodegenerative movement disorder after Parkinson's disease (PD).[1],[2] Recent studies have subclassified PSP into different clinical phenotypes.[3],[4],[5] The two most common PSP subtypes are Richardson's syndrome (PSP-R) and PSP- Parkinsonism More Details (PSP-P).[3],[4],[5] Of the subtypes, PSP-R is the most common subtype, having the typical clinical features of PSP.[3],[4],[5] Dynamic posturography (DP) is a method to quantitatively assess the balance abnormalities in different directions. It detects dynamic balance as well as directional balance of postural reflexes and may help in differentiation of early PSP from early PD.[6] In addition, there are various studies on advanced neuroimaging methods in different types of Parkinsonism, which have attempted to differentiate the clinical phenotypes of PSP.[7],[8] However, there is paucity of studies which have attempted to differentiate the various subgroups of PSP based on balance abnormalities.

This study was done to investigate the balance and radiological profile of patients with PSP and its subtypes. Patients with PSP were prospectively assessed using balance scales,[9],[10],[11] DP [6] and high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (3T). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to correlate DP with high-resolution MRI imaging in patients with PSP.


 » Materials and Methods Top


Patients

Consecutive patients satisfying the inclusion and exclusion criteria of probable and possible PSP as per the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke-SPSP criteria [12] were recruited from the Neurology Department of the National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), Bangalore, a tertiary referral center in Southern India. Only those PSP patients who were ambulant and were able to undergo DP were recruited. Patients with PSP were further subclassified into PSP-R and PSP-P based on the asymmetric Parkinsonism, tremors at onset, limb rigidity, and levodopa responsiveness.[5]

Controls

The controls were age - and gender-matched healthy subjects who were caregivers or family members of patients and gave consent to participate in the study. They were neurologically examined with emphasis on detection of abnormalities of eye movements, impaired balance and gait, and extrapyramidal signs.

The study was approved by the Institute Ethics Committee and written informed consent was taken from each subject.

Assessments

All patients underwent the following clinical assessments: (i) Unified PD rating scale (UPDRS) part III,[13],[14] (ii) PSP rating scale (PSPRS),[15] (iii) Berg balance scale (BBS),[9],[10] and (iv) Tinetti performance-oriented mobility assessment (POMA) scale with its subcomponent scores: Tinetti POMA balance (TPB), Tinetti POMA gait (TPG), Tinetti POMA total (TPT). The details of these scales are given in [Supplementary Table 1].[Additional file 1]

The patients and controls underwent DP (Biodex Balance System, Biodex, USA),[6] and MRI of brain in a 3-Tesla scanner (Philips, Achieva Scanner).

Dynamic posturography (Biodex Balance System)

This system consists of a suspended computerized circular platform that can tilt 20° in all directions from the horizontal. The system's microprocessor-based actuator controls the extent of the surface instability of the platform. The surface instability can be adjusted from Level 8 (most stable) to Level 1 (least stable). Level 8 was used for the examination of balance in all the subjects.[6]

The subject's hand and leg dominance was assessed through Edinburg inventory. All the subjects were explained and oriented to the test in training mode before the actual test. The subjects were tested for (a) dynamic stability, which included the ability to control balance in all directions (overall balance index [OBI]), front to back (anterior–posterior index [API]), and side-to-side (mediolateral index [MLI]); and, (b) the limits of stability (LOS) in all the directions. The degree of impairment of balance indices was obtained from the difference between the actual and predictive values.

LOS is defined as the area over which a subject can safely move without changing the base of support towards the target, which appears randomly in eight directions only once. The DP instrument (Biodex, USA) is designed to test the LOS by displaying a blinking target on a screen placed in front of the subject. The subjects are instructed to move their centers of mass toward the target, without changing the foot position. In the present study, LOS in eight directions are represented by forward (FW), backward (BW), right (RT), left (LT), FW-RT, FW-LT, BW-RT, and BW-LT vectors.

Higher scores in the UPDRS III, PSPRS, and balance indices are indicative of a poor balance whereas the higher scores are representative of better stability with the BBS, Tinetti POMA and LOS scales.

Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain

The MRI sequences included T1-weighted, T2-weighted (T2W), fluid-attenuated inversion recovery, and T1 MPRAGE sequences. Qualitative analysis of imaging included the identification of the specific signs, namely, the “Humming bird' sign (HBS) or the “Penguin silhouette” sign, the “Morning glory” sign (MGS), and generalized cortical atrophy (GCA).[16],[17],[18],[19],[20] The quantitative analysis of MRI included measurements of the AP diameter of midbrain in the axial plane, the area of midbrain, the area of pons, and the ratio of the area of midbrain to the area of pons, as per Oba et al.[17],[20],[21],[22],[23],[24]

Statistical analysis

SPSS 16 (SPSS for Windows, Version 16.0. IBM, Chicago) was used to analyze the data. Student's t-test [two-tailed, independent] was used to find the significance of the study parameters on a continuous scale between the two groups. Chi-square/Fisher exact test was used to determine the significance of the study parameters on categorical scale between two or more groups. Pearson correlation was determined between the clinical severity scores with radiological, balance and clinical variables. A P value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


 » Results Top


At the end of the study period, 29 patients with PSP were evaluated. There were 17 cases of the PSP-R subtype with a mean age of 62.5 ± 6.6 years and 12 cases of PSP-P subtype with a mean age of 59.0 ± 8.9 years (P = 0.06). The distribution of men and women between the two types of PSP was gender matched. The age at onset of symptoms (P = 0.05) and the age at falls (P = 0.09) were considerably lower in the case of PSP-P patients relative to the PSP-R patients. The demographic characteristics of the patients as well as controls are represented in [Table 1]. The levodopa responsiveness was better in the PSP-P subtype as compared to the PSP-R subtype; however, it did not reach statistical significance [Table 2]. Thirty healthy controls were enrolled into the study.
Table 1: Demographic characteristics of the patients and controls

Click here to view
Table 2: Comparison of qualitative balance scores between the subtypes of progressive supranuclear palsy

Click here to view


Qualitative balance scores

Among the clinical balance scales used, the PSPRS, TPG, and TPT scores were found to be statistically significant among the subtypes of PSP (P = 0.045; P = 0.031; and, P = 0.037) while UPDRS-III was not significant (P = 0.7). The PSP-R subtype performed poorly in comparison to the PSP-P subtype on these scales [Table 2].

Dynamic posturography (quantitative balance evaluation)

The mean values of balance indices were almost similar between the subtypes of PSP as compared to controls. The most significant of all the parameters in DP was LOS (P < 0.001) and the PSP-R subtype had lower scores [Table 3]. Significant correlations between the progressive supranuclear palsy rating scale and the qualitative and quantitative balance parameters were noted [Supplementary Table 2].[Additional file 2]

Overall progressive supranuclear palsy

There was a significant correlation of PSPRS with BBS (r = −0.642, P < 0.001), TPT (r = −0.516, P = 0.004), TPG (r = −0.449, P = 0.013), and TPB (r = −0.505, P = 0.004). LOS-BW-LT had significant positive correlation with BBS (r = 0.381, P = 0.038), TPB (r = 0.417, P = 0.022), and TPT scores (r = 0.362, P = 0.049).

Progressive supranuclear palsy of Richardson type

API had significant negative correlation with BBS (r = −0.589; P = 0.044) and TPT (r = −0.0562; P = 0.057) scores.

Progressive supranuclear palsy-Parkinsonian type

All the quantitative indices such as OBI (r = −0.79; P = 0.002), API (r = −0.589; P = 0.044), MLI (r = −0.604; P = 0.037), and LOS-BW-LT (r = 0.610; P = 0.035) had significant correlation with BBS. LOS-BW-LT also had significant correlation with TPB (r = 0.599; P = 0.039) and TPT (r = 0.57; P = 0.053) scores. There was also significant negative correlations of OBI with TPG (r = −0.772, P = 0.003) and TPT (r = −0.683, P = 0.013) and MLI with TPG (r = −0.688, P = 0.013).

Radiological parameters

The PSP-R subtype, compared to the PSP-P subtype, had more often radiological signs such as HBS (P < 0.001), MGS (P < 0.008), and GCA (P < 0.001). These signs were absent in controls, except for MGS, which was present in 23.3% of controls [Table 4]. The most statistically significant quantitative radiological parameter was the area of the midbrain (P < 0.002) and the ratio of midbrain to pons (P < 0.013). These parameters were worse in the PSP-R patients, better in the PSP-P patients, and normal in controls [Table 4].
Table 4: Comparison of radiological parameters between progressive supranuclear palsy subtypes and controls

Click here to view


Significant correlations among radiological parameters and quantitative, qualitative, and clinical rating scales in progressive supranuclear palsy and its subtypes

Overall progressive supranuclear palsy

There was a significant correlation of the midbrain axial AP diameter (r = 0.4; P = 0.03) and the ratio of midbrain to pons with BBS (r = 0.4; P = 0.02), indicating that these are worse in patients with midbrain atrophy. In DP, API correlated negatively with the midbrain axial AP diameter (r = −0.5; P = 0.01) and midbrain area (−0.39; P = 0.03). The LOS-BW correlated positively with the area of midbrain (r = 0.49; P = 0.001) and the midbrain to pons ratio (r = 0.57; r = 0.001). In addition, LOS-BW-LT correlated with the midbrain to pons ratio (r = 0.37; P = 0.43) [Supplementary Table 3].[Additional file 3]

Progressive supranuclear palsy-Parkinsonian subtype

There was a significant negative correlation between the midbrain axial AP diameter and the DP measures (OBI: r = −0.6; P = 0.024 and MLI: r = −0.6, P = 0.04), suggesting that lower the diameter, higher the balance abnormality. There was also a positive correlation with qualitative balance scores (TPG: r = 0.7, P = 0.006 and TPT: r = 0.7, P = 0.018) again indicating worsening of balance scores with lower midbrain axial AP diameter [Supplementary Table 2].

Progressive supranuclear palsy-Richardson subtype

The API values negatively correlated with the midbrain axial AP diameter showing that the midbrain atrophy was associated with abnormally high API scores (r = −0.5, P = 0.039). The LOS-BW score positively correlated with the area of midbrain and midbrain to pons ratio (both having r = 0.8 and P < 0.001) and the LOS-BW-LT score also positively correlated with the area of midbrain (r = 0.6, P = 0.012) and the midbrain to pons ratio (r = 0.7, P = 0.001). These indicate that worse balance scores (higher scores) were associated with disproportionately increased midbrain atrophy.

The cut-off value of the AP diameter of the midbrain in T2W MRI was 13.63 mm, which had a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 96.7%. The cutoff value of midbrain area was 129 mm 2 with a sensitivity and specificity of 90% and 93%, respectively. The cut-off ratio of the area of midbrain to pons in our study was 0.23 with a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 86.7%.


 » Discussion Top


The progressive balance abnormality in PSP is due to the early involvement of the brainstem structures. There are only a few studies that have investigated the relation of balance parameters (BBS, Tinetti POMA test, and DP indices) in PSP and its subtypes, with the other known clinical and radiological markers. In this study, we assessed the clinical, balance, and radiological parameters in patients with PSP and its subtypes and looked for any correlations among these parameters.

In our study, BBS was applied to all patients and as expected, all the patients scored lower values on BBS implying the greatest risk of falls. BBS was lower in the PSP-R subgroup compared to the PSP-P subgroup; however, there was no statistically significant difference in the response to levodopa.

BBS assesses only the static balance and does not include the gait measurement. Therefore, we used the Tinetti POMA test for assessing balance and gait. All the patients scored 18 indicating that they faced an extremely high risk of falls. Once again, there was no improvement following levodopa administration. The PSP-R subgroup had lower scores compared to the PSP-P subgroup, with no significant response to levodopa in either group. The lower response to levodopa was possibly due to a smaller sample size.

Quantitative balance parameters in the major groups by dynamic posturography

The mean values of the balance indices (OBI, API, and MLI) were similar in the PSP and control groups implying that in the early stages of PSP, these balance indices may not be sensitive measurements. In PSP, the mean overall as well as the component LOS scores in all the seven directions was significantly lower than in the controls. The scores, especially the overall status, as well as in the FW, FW-LT, BW, BW-RT, and BW-LT directions were significantly lower compared to controls. These findings suggest that the patients had significant difficulty in shifting their weight toward an unanticipated directional change even with visual cues in the respective directions. The overall LOS and LOS in the BW direction are very significant and are practically in close concordance with the clinical observation (historical as well as using the pull test) wherein it is observed that most of the patients of PSP lose balance in the BW direction. Hence, LOS is the most sensitive measure of change of balance in the early stages of PSP.

The only LOS score which was found to be statistically significant between the two subtypes was the LOS-RT, which implies a significant difficulty in shifting weight toward the right-sided direction in the R subtype. However, this isolated observation needs to be validated in a larger number of patients.

Imaging

In our study, HBS was seen in 80% of the patients due to the disproportionate atrophy of the rostral midbrain. It was mainly seen in the mid-sagittal plane. In their study, Kato et al.,[21] noted the HBS sign in all the eight patients of PSP while it was not seen in any of the PD patients or controls. Adachi et al.,[16] defined the HBS sign as the concavity of lateral tegmental margin of the midbrain that could be demonstrable in 4 out of the 5 patients (80%) of PSP. They correlated the presence of HBS sign with vertical supranuclear palsy.[16]

In our study, we found MGS to be present in 60% of PSP patients and 23.3% of healthy controls. The presence of MGS in our healthy controls could be the result of generalized atrophy as described by Mori et al.[25] Mori et al., evaluated eight consecutive cases of PSP and concluded that MGS had a low sensitivity and also added that HBS was superior to MGS.[25] In our study, although HBS was absent in all the controls, 23.3% of the controls had MGS. This observation suggests that HBS may be more specific than MGS in aiding in the diagnosis of PSP. In the past, the sensitivity of the HBS has been reported to range from 55% to 100%.[17],[18],[22]

HBS and MGS were relatively more frequent in the R subtype (94%) compared to the PSP-P subtype (66%). This finding is in agreement with the previous radiological study by Agosta et al., in which the authors compared the PSP-R patients with the PSP-P subgroup and found a higher level of white matter atrophy at the level of midbrain in the former group.[26]

In the current study, the mean axial diameter of the midbrain in the PSP patients was 12.7 mm in contrast to 15.1 mm in the controls (P < 0.001). The mean diameters were even lower in the PSP-R subtype compared to the PSP-P subtype (11.9 mm vs. 16.4 mm) [P < 0.001]. The cut-off value of the AP diameter of midbrain in T2W MRI was ≤13.63, which had a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 96.7%. Schrag et al., Warmuth-Metz et al., and Asato et al., have used different cut-off points and found that the sensitivity increases using a lower cut-off value.[19],[23],[26],[27]

The mean midbrain area in our study was 93 mm 2 in PSP patients compared to 147 mm 2 in the controls (P < 0.001). Slowinski et al., reported the mean midbrain area of 99 mm 2 in the PSP patients as compared with 141 mm 2 in the control group.[20] Oba et al., reported the mean midbrain area of 56 mm 2 in PSP patients and 117 mm 2 in controls.[17]

In our study, the highest sensitivity was noted for the area of midbrain and the ratio of midbrain to pons, followed by the axial diameter of the midbrain. We found the range of midbrain to pons ratio in PSP was 0.18 and 0.29 in controls (P < 0.001). Slowinski et al., reported similar findings with the ratio of 0.2 and 0.25 in the PSP and controls, respectively.[20] The ratio of midbrain to pons of 0.18 in our study showed a diagnostic sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 86.7% in helping to differentiate PSP patients from controls. Cosottini et al., reported an 86% sensitivity and a 100% specificity of the midbrain to pons ratio in differentiating PSP from PD and multiple system atrophy-Parkinsonism (MSA-P).[22] However, Quattrone et al., did not find this ratio to be useful for the differentiation of PSP from PD and MSA-P.[24] The cut-off values of the ratio of area of midbrain to pons in our study was ≤ 0.23 with a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 86.7%. Oba et al., measured the sensitivity and specificity of the ratio of area of midbrain to pons (cut-off value of 0.12) to the extent of 100%.[17] On subtype analysis, the PSP-R patients were noted to have even lesser values of ratio of midbrain to pons relative to the PSP-P patients (0.15 mm vs. 0.21 mm).

Correlation of radiological parameters with balance scales

In the overall PSP group, the midbrain to pons ratio and the area of midbrain positively correlated with the BBS score. In the PSP-P subgroup, the midbrain axial AP diameter showed a significant positive correlation with the TPG and TPT scores. However, in the PSP-R group, no such correlations were observed. These correlations suggest that either the BBS or some of the subscores of Tinetti POMA may reflect the true disease severity associated with the midbrain atrophy, at least in the PSP-P group.

It was observed that the most important correlations of the midbrain atrophy were found in the overall PSP group, and to a lesser extent, in the PSP-P group, and least in the PSP-R group. This suggests that the qualitative and quantitative measurements of severity of balance in PSP-P are better markers of the predominant pathology (evident as atrophy on MRI) in the midbrain. On the other hand, apart from the midbrain, other areas of brain may also be affected in the PSP-R subtype.

To conclude, the clinical severity scale (PSPRS) correlated well with BBS and TPT only in the overall PSP group; however, PSPRS correlated with LOS in all the three groups. PSPRS did not correlate with the imaging in any of the three groups. The DP score correlated well with midbrain atrophy in the overall PSP group and the subtypes of PSP. The qualitative balance scale abnormality was an indicator of midbrain atrophy only in the overall PSP group (with BBS) and the PSP-P group (with TPT) but not in the PSP-R group. We found that the qualitative and quantitative scales for balance correlated well in the PSP overall group and in PSP-P group but not in PSP-R group.

Thus, our study shows that the measurements of balance severity in the PSP-P group correlate with the predominant pathology of the midbrain (midbrain atrophy); while in PSP-R subtype, the balance abnormalities could be a result of pathology in different or overlapping areas. Further studies should be directed to correlate the qualitative and quantitative balance abnormalities with serial imaging of the brain in larger cohorts of patients of each subtype of PSP.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
 » References Top

1.
Steele JC, Richardson JC, Olszewski J. Progressive supranuclear palsy. A heterogeneous degeneration involving the brain stem, basal ganglia and cerebellum with vertical gaze and pseudobulbar palsy, nuchal dystonia and dementia. Arch Neurol 1964;10:333-59.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Litvan I. Update on epidemiological aspects of progressive supranuclear palsy. Mov Disord 2003;18 Suppl 6:S43-50.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Williams DR, Lees AJ. Progressive supranuclear palsy: Clinicopathological concepts and diagnostic challenges. Lancet Neurol 2009;8:270-9.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Respondek G, Stamelou M, Kurz C, Ferguson LW, Rajput A, Chiu WZ, et al. The phenotypic spectrum of progressive supranuclear palsy: A retrospective multicenter study of 100 definite cases. Mov Disord 2014;29:1758-66.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Williams DR, de Silva R, Paviour DC, Pittman A, Watt HC, Kilford L, et al. Characteristics of two distinct clinical phenotypes in pathologically proven progressive supranuclear palsy: Richardson's syndrome and PSP-Parkinsonism. Brain 2005;128(Pt 6):1247-58.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Ondo W, Warrior D, Overby A, Calmes J, Hendersen N, Olson S, et al. Computerized posturography analysis of progressive supranuclear palsy: A case-control comparison with Parkinson's disease and healthy controls. Arch Neurol 2000;57:1464-9.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Seppi K, Schocke MF, Esterhammer R, Kremser C, Brenneis C, Mueller J, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging discriminates progressive supranuclear palsy from PD, but not from the Parkinson variant of multiple system atrophy. Neurology 2003;60:922-7.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Paviour DC, Thornton JS, Lees AJ, Jäger HR. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging differentiates Parkinsonian variant of multiple-system atrophy from progressive supranuclear palsy. Mov Disord 2007;22:68-74.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Berg KO, Maki BE, Williams JI, Holliday PJ, Wood-Dauphinee SL. Clinical and laboratory measures of postural balance in an elderly population. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992;73:1073-80.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Berg KO, Wood-Dauphinee SL, Williams JI, Maki B. Measuring balance in the elderly: Validation of an instrument. Can J Public Health 1992;83 Suppl 2:S7-11.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Raîche M, Hébert R, Prince F, Corriveau H. Screening older adults at risk of falling with the Tinetti balance scale. Lancet 2000;356:1001-2.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Litvan I, Agid Y, Calne D, Campbell G, Dubois B, Duvoisin RC, et al. Clinical research criteria for the diagnosis of progressive supranuclear palsy (Steele-Richardson-Olszewski syndrome): Report of the NINDS-SPSP international workshop. Neurology 1996;47:1-9.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Richards M, Marder K, Cote L, Mayeux R. Interrater reliability of the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale motor examination. Mov Disord 1994;9:89-91.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
van Hilten JJ, van der Zwan AD, Zwinderman AH, Roos RA. Rating impairment and disability in Parkinson's disease: Evaluation of the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale. Mov Disord 1994;9:84-8.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Golbe LI, Ohman-Strickland PA. A clinical rating scale for progressive supranuclear palsy. Brain 2007;130(Pt 6):1552-65.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Adachi M, Kawanami T, Ohshima H, Sugai Y, Hosoya T. Morning glory sign: A particular MR finding in progressive supranuclear palsy. Magn Reson Med Sci 2004;3:125-32.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Oba H, Yagishita A, Terada H, Barkovich AJ, Kutomi K, Yamauchi T, et al. New and reliable MRI diagnosis for progressive supranuclear palsy. Neurology 2005;64:2050-5.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Savoiardo M, Girotti F, Strada L, Ciceri E. Magnetic resonance imaging in progressive supranuclear palsy and other Parkinsonian disorders. J Neural Transm Suppl 1994;42:93-110.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Schrag A, Good CD, Miszkiel K, Morris HR, Mathias CJ, Lees AJ, et al. Differentiation of atypical Parkinsonian syndromes with routine MRI. Neurology 2000;54:697-702.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Slowinski J, Imamura A, Uitti RJ, Pooley RA, Strongosky AJ, Dickson DW, et al. MR imaging of brainstem atrophy in progressive supranuclear palsy. J Neurol 2008;255:37-44.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Kato N, Arai K, Hattori T. Study of the rostral midbrain atrophy in progressive supranuclear palsy. J Neurol Sci 2003;210:57-60.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Cosottini M, Ceravolo R, Faggioni L, Lazzarotti G, Michelassi MC, Bonuccelli U, et al. Assessment of midbrain atrophy in patients with progressive supranuclear palsy with routine magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Neurol Scand 2007;116:37-42.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Warmuth-Metz M, Naumann M, Csoti I, Solymosi L. Measurement of the midbrain diameter on routine magnetic resonance imaging: A simple and accurate method of differentiating between Parkinson disease and progressive supranuclear palsy. Arch Neurol 2001;58:1076-9.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Quattrone A, Nicoletti G, Messina D, Fera F, Condino F, Pugliese P, et al. MR imaging index for differentiation of progressive supranuclear palsy from Parkinson disease and the Parkinson variant of multiple system atrophy. Radiology 2008;246:214-21.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Mori H, Aoki S, Ohtomo K. Morning glory sign is not prevalent in progressive supranuclear palsy. Magn Reson Med Sci 2004;3:215.  Back to cited text no. 25
[PUBMED]    
26.
Agosta F, Kostic VS, Galantucci S, Mesaros S, Svetel M, Pagani E, et al. The in vivo distribution of brain tissue loss in Richardson's syndrome and PSP-Parkinsonism: A VBM-DARTEL study. Eur J Neurosci 2010;32:640-7.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Asato R, Akiguchi I, Masunaga S, Hashimoto N. Magnetic resonance imaging distinguishes progressive supranuclear palsy from multiple system atrophy. J Neural Transm (Vienna) 2000;107:1427-36.  Back to cited text no. 27
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]

This article has been cited by
1 Shaky and unsteady: Dynamic posturography in essential tremor
Shweta Prasad,Selva Ganapathy Velayutham,Venkateswara Reddy Reddam,Albert Stezin,Ketan Jhunjhunwala,Pramod Kumar Pal
Journal of the Neurological Sciences. 2018; 385: 12
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Radiological biomarkers for diagnosis in PSP: Where are we and where do we need to be?
Jennifer L. Whitwell,Günter U. Höglinger,Angelo Antonini,Yvette Bordelon,Adam L. Boxer,Carlo Colosimo,Thilo van Eimeren,Lawrence I. Golbe,Jan Kassubek,Carolin Kurz,Irene Litvan,Alexander Pantelyat,Gil Rabinovici,Gesine Respondek,Axel Rominger,James B. Rowe,Maria Stamelou,Keith A. Josephs
Movement Disorders. 2017; 32(7): 955
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
   
Online since 20th March '04
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow