Objectives: Levodopa–Carbidopa Intrajejunal gel (LCIG) infusion is an effective intervention for people with advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD). Although age may not be a limiting factor for LCIG implant, no data are available on late elderly PD (LE-PD) subjects. In this cross-sectional, we aimed to demonstrate if older age may impact on quality of life (QoL), motor and non-motor symptoms severity, and profile of side effects in PD treated with LCIG. Methods: Out of 512 PD subjects treated with LCIG at 9 Italian PD centers, we selected 25 LE-PD defined as age ≥ 80 years at last follow-up who were available to attend the study visit. Twenty-five PD patients (Control-PD, defined as age < 75 years at last follow-up) matched to LE-PD by disease and LCIG duration served as control group. The following motor and non-motor variables were ascertained: quality of life (PDQ-8), time spent in ON, wearing-off Questionnaire, Unified PD Rating Scale, freezing of gait questionnaire, Parkinson’s disease sleep scale-2, Non Motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS), and MOCA. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between LE-PD and Control-PD on PDQ-8 and several motor and non-motor variables. LE-PD had less frequent and milder impulsive–compulsive behaviors and milder dyskinesia. At multivariable regression, worse quality of life was associated with UPDRS-III and NMSS scores but not to age at study visit and age at LICG implant. Rate of adverse effects was similar in both groups. Drop-out rate calculated in the whole PD cohort was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion: Our data provide evidence that valuable LCIG infusion might be achieved in late elderly PD.
Levodopa–carbidopa intrajejunal infusion in Parkinson’s disease: untangling the role of age
Eleopra R.;Cossu G.
2021
Abstract
Objectives: Levodopa–Carbidopa Intrajejunal gel (LCIG) infusion is an effective intervention for people with advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD). Although age may not be a limiting factor for LCIG implant, no data are available on late elderly PD (LE-PD) subjects. In this cross-sectional, we aimed to demonstrate if older age may impact on quality of life (QoL), motor and non-motor symptoms severity, and profile of side effects in PD treated with LCIG. Methods: Out of 512 PD subjects treated with LCIG at 9 Italian PD centers, we selected 25 LE-PD defined as age ≥ 80 years at last follow-up who were available to attend the study visit. Twenty-five PD patients (Control-PD, defined as age < 75 years at last follow-up) matched to LE-PD by disease and LCIG duration served as control group. The following motor and non-motor variables were ascertained: quality of life (PDQ-8), time spent in ON, wearing-off Questionnaire, Unified PD Rating Scale, freezing of gait questionnaire, Parkinson’s disease sleep scale-2, Non Motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS), and MOCA. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between LE-PD and Control-PD on PDQ-8 and several motor and non-motor variables. LE-PD had less frequent and milder impulsive–compulsive behaviors and milder dyskinesia. At multivariable regression, worse quality of life was associated with UPDRS-III and NMSS scores but not to age at study visit and age at LICG implant. Rate of adverse effects was similar in both groups. Drop-out rate calculated in the whole PD cohort was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion: Our data provide evidence that valuable LCIG infusion might be achieved in late elderly PD.I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
