Spectrum of Cardiovascular Autonomic Dysfunction and 24-hour Blood Pressure Variability in Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Uncertainty prevails regarding the patterns of autonomic dysfunction in patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (IPD). This study was undertaken with the aim of assessing the complete spectrum of cardiovascular autonomic function tests (CAFTs) and blood pressure variability patterns in IPD patients while comparing the same with age-matched controls. Methods: Patients with IPD presenting to the Christian Medical College and Hospital from December 2016 to November 2018 along with age-matched controls were prospectively evaluated using CAFTs. The IPD patients also underwent ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM), and the diurnal systolic BP differences were used to classify into dippers (10-20%), non-dippers (0–10%), reverse dippers (<0%), and extreme dippers (>20%). Results: Autonomic dysfunction (AD) was prevalent in 41 (68.3%) IPD patients even in early disease (median (inter-quartile range) symptom duration 2 (1–4) years, mean Hoehn and Yahr (H&Y) stage 2 (1.5–2.8). Both sympathetic and parasympathetic parameters were impaired among IPD patients when compared to healthy controls. (E: I ratio 1.17 ± 0.12 vs 1.26 ± 0.14 ( P < 0.001), Valsalva ratio (VR) 1.33 ± 0.27 vs 1.55 ± 0.25 ( P < 0.001), PRT 100 9.6 ± 8.0 vs 3.1 ± 1.8 ( P < 0.001), tilt-up SBP Avg change 8.8 (4.2–13.8) vs 1.8 (−2.9–6.1) ( P < 0.001), tilt-up HR Avg change 4.8 (2.2–8.2) vs 1.9 (−0.7–5.1) ( P < 0.001). BP variability was demonstrated in 47 (79.7%) of IPD patients, with reverse dipping pattern in 28 (47.5%) seen more frequently in this cohort. Conclusions: Timely detection of AD may be helpful not only in recognizing IPD in its pre-motor stages but also in optimizing management for this population of patients. BP variability and abnormal dipping patterns on ABPM can be a potential marker of dysautonomia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".