4.3 Article

Ultrasound-guided versus 'blind' intraparotid injections of botulinum toxin-A for the treatment of sialorrhoea in patients with Parkinson's disease

Journal

CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY
Volume 106, Issue 2, Pages 93-96

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2003.10.012

Keywords

sialorrhoea; Parkinson's disease; botulinum toxin-A; ultrasound guidance; parotid gland; saliva

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of intraparotid botulinum toxin-A (BTX-A) injections into parotid gland using ultrasoundguided versus nonguided techniques for the treatment of sialorrhoea in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: 15 patients with PD and sialorrhoea were included and divided into two groups. Group A patients (n = 8) were injected with BTX-A using ultrasound guidance. Group B patients (n = 7) were injected with BTX-A without ultrasound guidance. Saliva secretion was assessed quantitatively at baseline and at weeks 1, 4, and 12. Patients and/or caregivers also assessed the saliva secretion using visual analog scale (VAS). Results: All patients except one reported subjective improvement in sialorrhoea at the first week. Group A patients showed significantly higher rate of saliva reduction at the first week, whereas in Group B the reduction was not statistically significant from baseline at the first week (P > 0.05). Comparisons of quantitative saliva assessments at each follow-up visit also showed that ultrasound-guided injections were superior to blind injections for saliva reduction. VAS scores showed an improvement in the mean rate of saliva secretion in each group at first week (P < 0.05). Two patients suffered from dry mouth in mild severity lasting I month. Conclusion: Intraparotid BTX-A injections using ultrasound guidance may be an effective, easy, and safe treatment for parkinsonian sialorrhoea. (C) 2003 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

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available