Since its first introduction, levodopa has become the cornerstone for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease and remains the leading therapeutic choice for motor control therapy so far. Unfortunately, the subsequent appearance of abnormal involuntary movements, known as dyskinesias, is a frequent drawback. Despite the deep knowledge of this complication, in terms of clinical phenomenology and the temporal relationship during a levodopa regimen, less is clear about the pathophysiological mechanisms underpinning it. As the disease progresses, specific oscillatory activities of both motor cortical and basal ganglia neurons and variation in levodopa metabolism, in terms of the dopamine receptor stimulation pattern and turnover rate, underlie dyskinesia onset. This review aims to provide a global overview on levodopa-induced dyskinesias, focusing on pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, therapy management strategies and future directions.

Stroke, a complex and heterogeneous disease, is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The timely therapeutic intervention significantly impacts patient outcomes, but early stroke diagnosis is challenging due to the lack of specific diagnostic biomarkers. This review critically examines the literature for potential biomarkers that may aid in early diagnosis, differentiation between ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, and prediction of hemorrhagic transformation in ischemic stroke. After a thorough analysis, four promising biomarkers were identified: Antithrombin III (ATIII), fibrinogen, and ischemia-modified albumin (IMA) for diagnostic purposes; glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), micro RNA 124-3p, and a panel of 11 metabolites for distinguishing between ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke; and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9), s100b, and interleukin 33 for predicting hemorrhagic transformation. We propose a biomarker panel integrating these markers, each reflecting different pathophysiological stages of stroke, that could significantly improve stroke patients’ early detection and treatment. Despite promising results, further research and validation are needed to demonstrate the clinical utility of this proposed panel for routine stroke treatment.

Introduction: The present study explores brain connectivity in Parkinson’s disease (PD) and in age matched healthy controls (HC), using quantitative EEG analysis, at rest and during a motor tasks. We also evaluated the diagnostic performance of the phase locking value (PLV), a measure of functional connectivity, in differentiating PD patients from HCs. Methods: High-density, 64-channels, EEG data from 26 PD patients and 13 HC were analyzed. EEG signals were recorded at rest and during a motor task. Phase locking value (PLV), as a measure of functional connectivity, was evaluated for each group in a resting state and during a motor task for the following frequency bands: (i) delta: 2–4 Hz; (ii) theta: 5–7 Hz; (iii) alpha: 8–12 Hz; beta: 13–29 Hz; and gamma: 30–60 Hz. The diagnostic performance in PD vs. HC discrimination was evaluated. Results: Results showed no significant differences in PLV connectivity between the two groups during the resting state, but a higher PLV connectivity in the delta band during the motor task, in HC compared to PD. Comparing the resting state versus the motor task for each group, only HCs showed a higher PLV connectivity in the delta band during motor task. A ROC curve analysis for HC vs. PD discrimination, showed an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.75, a sensitivity of 100%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100%. Conclusions: The present study evaluated the brain connectivity through quantitative EEG analysis in Parkinson’s disease versus healthy controls, showing a higher PLV connectivity in the delta band during the motor task, in HC compared to PD. This neurophysiology biomarkers showed the potentiality to be explored in future studies as a potential screening biomarker for PD patients.

Background: Evaluation of movement disorders primarily relies on phenomenology. Despite refinements in diagnostic criteria, the accuracy remains suboptimal. Such a gap may be bridged by machine learning and video technology, which permit objective, quantitative, non‐invasive motor analysis. Markerless automated video‐analysis, namely Computer Vision, emerged as best suited for ecologically‐valid assessment.Objectives: To systematically review the application of Computer Vision for assessment, diagnosis, and monitoring of movement disorders.Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines, we searched Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus databases for articles published between 1984 and September 2024. We used the following search strategy: (“video analysis” OR “computer vision”) AND (“Parkinson's disease” OR “PD” OR “tremor” OR “dystonia” OR “parkinsonism” OR “progressive supranuclear palsy” OR “PSP” OR “multiple system atrophy” OR “MSA” OR “corticobasal syndrome” OR “CBS” OR “chorea” OR “ballism” OR “myoclonus” OR “Tourette's syndrome”).Results: Out of 1099 identified studies, 61 met inclusion criteria, and 10 additional studies were included based on authors’ judgment. Parkinson's disease was the most investigated movement disorder, with gait as the prevalent motor task. OpenPose was the most used pose estimation software. Automated video‐analysis consistently achieved diagnostic accuracies exceeding 80% across most movement disorders. For tremor, dystonia severity and tic detection, Computer Vision strongly aligned with accelerometery and clinical assessments.Conclusions: Computer Vision holds potential to provide non‐invasive quantification of presence and severity of movement disorders. Heterogeneity in video settings, software usage, and definition of standardized guidelines for videorecording are challenges to be addressed for real‐word applications.

Quantitative indoor monitoring, in a low-invasive and accurate way, is still an unmet need in clinical practice. Indoor environments are more challenging than outdoor environments, and are where patients experience difficulty in performing activities of daily living (ADLs). In line with the recent trends of telemedicine, there is an ongoing positive impulse in moving medical assistance and management from hospitals to home settings. Different technologies have been proposed for indoor monitoring over the past decades, with different degrees of invasiveness, complexity, and capabilities in full-body monitoring. The major classes of devices proposed are inertial-based sensors (IMU), vision-based devices, and geomagnetic and radiofrequency (RF) based sensors. In recent years, among all available technologies, there has been an increasing interest in using RF-based technology because it can provide a more accurate and reliable method of tracking patients’ movements compared to other methods, such as camera-based systems or wearable sensors. Indeed, RF technology compared to the other two techniques has higher compliance, low energy consumption, does not need to be worn, is less susceptible to noise, is not affected by lighting or other physical obstacles, has a high temporal resolution without a limited angle of view, and fewer privacy issues. The aim of the present narrative review was to describe the potential applications of RF-based indoor monitoring techniques and highlight their differences compared to other monitoring technologies.

Introduction: Gait features differ between Parkinson’s disease (PD) and healthy subjects (HS). Kinematic alterations of gait include reduced gait speed, swing time, and stride length between PD patients and HS. Stride time and swing time variability are increased in PD patients with respect to HS. Additionally, dynamic parameters of asymmetry of gait are significantly different among the two groups. The aim of the present study is to evaluate which kind of gait analysis (dynamic or kinematic) is more informative to discriminate PD and HS gait features. Methods: In the present study, we analyzed gait dynamic and kinematic features of 108 PD patients and 88 HS from four cohorts of two datasets. Results: Kinematic features showed statistically significant differences among PD patients and HS for gait speed and time Up and Go test and for selected kinematic dispersion indices (standard deviation and interquartile range of swing, stance, and double support time). Dynamic features did not show any statistically significant difference between PD patients and HS. Discussion: Despite kinematics features like acceleration being directly proportional to dynamic features like ground reaction force, the results of this study showed the so-called force/rhythm dichotomy since kinematic features were more informative than dynamic ones.