4.5 Review

Tremor pathophysiology: lessons from neuroimaging

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN NEUROLOGY
卷 33, 期 4, 页码 474-481

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000829

关键词

dystonia; essential tremor; Holmes tremor; Parkinson; pathophysiology

资金

  1. Dutch Brain Foundation [F201315]
  2. Dutch Organization for Scientific Research (VENI grant) [91617077]
  3. Junior Scientific Masterclass Groningen, Mandema Stipendium 2018

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose of review We discuss the latest neuroimaging studies investigating the pathophysiology of Parkinson's tremor, essential tremor, dystonic tremor and Holmes tremor. Recent findings Parkinson's tremor is associated with increased activity in the cerebello-thalamo-cortical circuit, with interindividual differences depending on the clinical dopamine response of the tremor. Although dopamine-resistant Parkinson's tremor arises from a larger contribution of the (dopamine-insensitive) cerebellum, dopamine-responsive tremor may be explained by thalamic dopamine depletion. In essential tremor, deep brain stimulation normalizes cerebellar overactivity, which fits with the cerebellar oscillator hypothesis. On the other hand, disconnection of the dentate nucleus and abnormal white matter microstructural integrity support a decoupling of the cerebellum in essential tremor. In dystonic tremor, there is evidence for involvement of both cerebellum and basal ganglia, although this may depend on the clinical phenotype. Finally, in Holmes tremor, different causal lesions map to a common network consisting of the red nucleus, internal globus pallidus, thalamus, cerebellum and pontomedullary junction. The pathophysiology of all investigated tremors involves the cerebello-thalamo-cortical pathway, and clinical and pathophysiological features overlap among tremor disorders. We draw the outlines of a hypothetical pathophysiological axis, which may be used besides clinical features and cause in future tremor classifications.

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