4.5 Article

Serum heart-fatty acid binding protein levels in patients with Lewy body disease

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES
Volume 266, Issue 1-2, Pages 20-24

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2007.08.018

Keywords

dementia with Lewy bodies; Parkinson's disease; Alzheimer's disease; MIBG cardiac scintigraphy; H/M ratio; sympathetic nerve dysfunction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: In order to examine a possible role of serum heart-fatty acid binding protein (H-FABP) in patients with Lewy body disease, we measured serum levels of H-FABP in patients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson's disease (PD), and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Methods: Serum levels of H-FABP were measured using a solid-phase enzyme-linked immunoassay. Iodine-123 metaiodobenzylguanidine (I-123-MIBG) cardiac scintigraphy was performed on each patient and the heart to mediastinum (H/M) ratio was calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to calculate the optimal cutoff values of the H-FABP between DLB and AD patients. Independent predictive variables for serum H-FABP levels were analyzed using multivariate regression analysis. Results: Serum levels of H-FABP were significantly higher in DLB patients and PD patients than in AD patients. FIN ratios of the DLB and PD patients were significantly lower than those of AD patients. The diagnostic value of the serum H-FABP levels between AD and DLB patients was inferior to that of the delayed HIM ratio of I-123-MIBG cardiac scintigraphy. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that the delayed H/M ratio predicted serum H-FABP levels in the PD patients. Conclusions: Examination of serum H-FABP levels did not allow discrimination between DLB and AD patients. Cardiac sympathetic nerve dysfunction may be associated with elevation of serum H-FABP in Lewy body disease patients. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available