Skip to main content
Download PDF

The effectiveness and safety of botulinum toxin injections for the treatment of sialorrhea with Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology volume 24, Article number: 52 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Botulinum toxin (BoNT) injection is an important adjunctive method to treat sialorrhea. The purpose of this systematic review was to analyze the effect and safety of BoNT injections in the intervention of sialorrhea with Parkinson’s disease (PD).

Methods

We searched PubMed, Web Of Science (WOS), Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase from inception until April 2022. Randomized controlled trials or randomized crossover trials comparing BoNT with placebo in sialorrhea with PD were eligible. PRISMA guidelines were used to carry out the meta-analysis. The Drooling Severity Frequency Scale (DSFS) score and the number of adverse events (AEs) were the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and risk differences (RDs) are used to express continuous and categorical outcomes, respectively. Heterogeneity among these studies was evaluated using I2 tests. We used the GRADE tool to assess the certainty of evidence (COE).

Results

Eight articles involving 259 patients compared BoNT injections with a placebo for PD with sialorrhea. This meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in DSFS scores between BoNT injections and placebo (SMD=-0.98; 95% CI, -1.27 to 0.70, p<0.001; COE: high). This meta-analysis showed a significant difference in AEs between BoNT injections and placebo (RD=0.15; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.24, p=0.002; COE: low).

Conclusions

The pooled results suggest that BoNT injections have some effect on DSFS scores with sialorrhea caused by PD. There are also mild adverse events, which generally recover within a week or so. The results indicate that BoNT injection is one of the treatments for sialorrhea caused by PD, but we need to pay attention to adverse events. In addition, the follow-up time was extended to observe oral hygiene, ulceration or dental caries, and digestive function.

Trial registration

Our review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (42021288334).

Peer Review reports

Background

Salivation, also known as drooling, occurs when there is excess saliva in the mouth over the edge of the lips [1, 2]. This is normal in infants, but drooling gradually decreases as development matures and usually disappears at approximately 15 to 18 months [3]. Sialorrhea can cause embarrassment, isolation, depression, and skin infection and can lead to pneumonia because saliva is pooled in the mouth. Many approaches, such as physiotherapy, aspiration, medication, radiotherapy, and surgical intervention, have been used to manage sialorrhea [4]. However, these are symptomatic treatments, and there is no universally accepted treatment.

The advent of Botulinum toxin (BoNT) injections seems very promising. BoNT was initially thought to be the cause of food poisoning [5]. At the end of the 18th century, some disease outbreaks were linked to sausages in southwestern Germany [6]. In 1977, Allan Scott [7] first injected a patient with strabismus. Since then, BoNT has been increasingly used in clinical practice. Later, BoNT was also considered the treatment of choice for sialorrhea. Studies have shown that Rimabotulinum toxin B treatment of sialorrhea improves the unstimulated salivary flow rate and the clinical global impression of change [8]. A meta-analysis showed that BoNT types A and B significantly reduce salivation in patients with neurological disorders [9]. Growing research shows the potential of BoNT treatment for sialorrhea.

The effects of BoNT injections with sialorrhea have also been known for years, but their use was limited because of a lack of approval studies [10]. There are differences in the types and doses of BoNT used in different countries, such as the USA and Europe. OnabotulinumtoxinA and AbobotulinumtoxinA are off-label treatments for sialorrhea. A meta-analysis showed that the recommended level of BoNT treatment for sialorrhea in adults and children is different [11]. BoNT remains a controversial and attractive drug. This may be related to do with the etiology and mechanism of sialorrhea. Sialorrhea is more common in Parkinson's disease (PD), cerebral palsy, stroke, a side effect of medications, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, schizophrenic and intellectual disease. Sialorrhea may be due to increased salivary secretion, failure to clear saliva in the mouth, and miscoordination of the oral-facial and palatoglossus muscles [2]. Therefore, the sialorrhea mechanism caused by each disease may be different, so the efficacy and adverse effects of BoNT treatment may be different.

As the population ages, the burden of PD is increasing, seriously affecting people's activities of daily living [12]. PD is the second most common neurodegenerative disorder, affecting approximately 1% of adults older than 60 years [13,14,15,16]. An estimated 6.2 million people worldwide suffer from PD [12, 17]. As research continues, our understanding of PD continues to evolve. Initially, we recognized that it was typically characterized by motor symptoms, such as rigidity, bradykinesia, and resting tremor [18]. Motor symptoms are key to diagnosing PD [19], but non-motor symptoms (NMS) of PD are common and often overlooked, such as sialorrhea, dementia, depression, and sleep disorders [20]. NMSs are prevalent in over 90% of PD patients [21], and there are more women than men [22]. NMSs are common in early PD, reflecting that the disease damages multiple systems [23]. Some NMSs have a greater impact on the quality of life of people with PD [24]. The most common in the early stages of PD is excessive saliva [23]. A large number of patients with PD undergo sialorrhea, ranging from 32% to 74% [25]. Studies show that more than 80% of patients with PD experience sialorrhea [26, 27]. We initially thought that Parkinson's patients had excessive salivary production, but studies have found that Parkinson's patients have less salivary production than normal people [28,29,30]. Sialorrhea can be caused by excessive salivation, difficulty swallowing, or both [29, 31]. Some studies have shown that sialorrhea is thought to be due to dysphagia, which reduces the effective removal of saliva rather than excessive drooling [32]. Some researchers have classified sialorrhea as gastrointestinal dysfunction or autonomic dysfunction [33, 34]. The pathogenesis of sialorrhea in PD remains controversial.

Currently, injections of BoNT reduce salivary production by blocking acetylcholine in the corresponding glands. A systematic review showed that BoNT is an effective method for treating sialorrhea with PD [35, 36]. However, subjects with sialorrhea caused by neurological diseases other than Parkinson's disease were included in this study, and a meta-summary analysis was not performed. There was also a study that reported no statistical significance of BoNT in the treatment of sialorrhea caused by PD [37]. There was also no analysis of the safety of BoNT in treating the saliva of PD patients. To compare the results of prior studies of BoNT injection, we included only randomized controlled trials and crossover trials to meta-analyze the efficacy and safety of BoNT in the treatment of sialorrhea in PD.

Methods

Protocol and registration

This meta-analysis was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA statement [38]. Our review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (42021288334).

Search strategy

We conducted a systematic search of the literature to identify all studies reported in English from five different databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, Embase, and Web of Science, up to April 2022. We also scanned at Google Academic and clinicaltrials.gov. We reviewed a randomized, placebo-controlled, and crossover trial of BoNT injection for patients who were diagnosed with sialorrhea and PD. The keywords we used were Botulinum Toxins, abobotulinum toxin A OR incobotulinum toxin A OR rimabotulinum toxin B, and sialorrhea. The search strategies for each database are described in Supplement S1.

Eligibility criteria and study selection

We used Endnote software for literature management. First, two researchers (YCL and TYC) scanned the titles and abstracts to screen out potential studies and then read the full text to determine the final studies that met the criteria. Any disagreements were resolved by a third author (HJP).

Our inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) randomized controlled trial (RCT) or randomized crossover trial; 2) comparison of botulinum toxin with placebo; and 3) sialorrhea caused by PD. Excluded studies were as follows: 1) studies on patients enrolled in other neurological conditions except for PD; 2) non-English language published.

Data extraction and outcome measures

Data were independently extracted from eligible studies by two authors (YCL and WTT). Extracted data were compared, and any discrepancies were resolved through discussion with the third author (HJP). Relevant data, such as study time, sample size, dosage, type, and outcome, were extracted from all included papers [39]. The primary outcomes were the Drooling Severity and Frequency Scales (DSFS) scores [40]. The secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs), which were reported during the study. Data were collected using standard spreadsheets (Excel). If any information was unclear, we contacted the author to provide more detailed data.

Statistical analysis

We used inverse-variance and fixed-effects models to perform the meta-analysis in Review Manager (version 5.4; Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). The results for all outcomes were calculated using the change between the control group and the placebo group. We used SMDs and RDs to represent continuous and categorical results, respectively, as well as the 95% CIs. The I2 was reported as a measure of heterogeneity. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05. To provide clinical evidence, we divided these clinical trials into subgroups of BotoxA and BotoxB to investigate the efficacy and safety of BotoxA and BotoxB, respectively.

Assessment of risk of bias

The methodological quality of each study was independently assessed by the two reviewers (YCL and TYC) using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias method [37]. Disagreements were resolved through consultation with the third reviewer (HJP), if necessary. This instrument evaluates seven domains: random sequence generation, allocation concealment, performance bias, detection bias, attrition bias, reporting, and other biases. The overall risk of bias is low if the risk in all study areas is low. If there is a high risk in one region or uncertainty in multiple regions, the overall risk of bias is higher. The remaining studies were considered to have some concerns about the overall risk of bias.

Reporting bias assessment

We planned to generate funnel plots for the meta-analysis. If the forest map is asymmetric, we plan to review the characteristics of the trial to assess whether the asymmetry may be due to publication bias or other factors, such as methodological or clinical trial heterogeneity. To assess the reporting bias, we compared the results specified in the trial protocol with those reported in the corresponding trial publication. If tracking protocols were not available, we compared the results reported in the methods and results section of tracking publications.

Certainty assessment

We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence by importing data from RevMan 5.4 into a GRADE profile. The rating aspects were study limitations, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and publication bias [41].

Patient and public involvement

Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, conduct, reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

Results

Selection and characteristics of studies

Figure 1 is a flow chart of the selection process for the study. A total of 1772 studies were retrieved from the database, and 643 duplicate references were excluded by Endnote. After reviewing the titles or abstracts, another 1,087 studies were excluded because they were reviews or irrelevant. The full text of the remaining 42 studies was retrieved. The first screening excluded 23 studies that included neurological disorders and 11 non-randomized controlled trial studies. Eight studies were included [37, 40, 42,43,44,45,46,47]. One study did not include FSES scores in the results but evaluated saliva composition and adverse events [47]. Two studies could not obtain post-injection data for the experimental and control groups, and the authors could not be contacted [40, 46]. One study was a conference abstract [37]. One study used indirect data derived from reviews by others [46]. One study used three control doses, all of which were statistically significant compared with placebo [45]. Adverse events were reported in all studies. The characteristics of the included studies are detailed in Table 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow chart of the literature search process

Full size image
Table 1 Characteristics of included studies
Full size table

Study quality

We evaluated the literature quality of the study using the risk assessment tool of RevMan 5.4 software, as shown in Figs. 2 and 3. In selection bias, six studies were assessed as low, three were rated as unclear due to lack of detail [37, 42, 46], and one study did not explicitly report the use of randomization [47]. Allocative concealment was classified as unclear in two studies [37, 46], and one study was unlikely to use allocative concealment [47]. Because it was not possible to conduct blind testing of practitioners and participants considering dose differences and crossover trials, three studies were judged to be at high risk of performance bias in performance and detection bias [37, 45, 46]. Only two studies were blinded [43, 44], and other studies were unclear in terms of blinding outcome assessment. Four studies [40, 42, 44, 47] did not provide enough information to judge the risk of bias with incomplete outcome data. Selective reporting is not possible for all studies. There were no other risks of bias in any of the studies.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Risk of bias graph

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3

Risk of bias summary

Full size image

Outcome of DSFS

Nine studies involving 224 patients reported information about DSFS outcomes. Two studies cited data from others because they did not report outcomes after treatment in the BoNT injection group and the placebo group [37, 40, 46]. In one study, we used the median instead of the mean [46]. As depicted in Fig. 4, this meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in DSFS scores between BoNT injections and placebo (SMD=-0.98; 95% CI, -1.27 to 0.70, p<0.001; COE: high); no significant heterogeneity was detected across the nine studies (p = 0.22, I2=25%). In terms of subgroup analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups, indicating that there was no significant difference in effect between type A and Type B. Publication bias is unlikely from the funnel plot (Fig. 5).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Forest plot of comparison: DSFS. DSFS: Drooling severity frequency scale

Full size image
Fig. 5
figure 5

Funnel plot of comparison: DSFS. DSFS: Drooling severity frequency scale

Full size image

Outcome of adverse events

AEs were counted in all ten trials involving subjects. Figure 6 shows a difference in AEs between BoNT injections and placebo (RD=0.15; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.24, p=0.002; COE: low); The severity of most treatment-related AEs was mild to moderate and self-limited. Patients taking BoNT had dry mouth significantly more often than those taking placebo, and other AEs included neck pain, diarrhea, and worsened gait. Two botulinum toxin-B subjects and three placebo subjects experienced at least one serious AE [45], atrial fibrillation, and urosepsis. None were deemed related to the study drug, and all events were resolved. In terms of subgroup analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.37, I2=0%). During the heterogeneity analysis, the heterogeneity of one study was obvious, and after excluding this study [42], the heterogeneity was not significant across the nine studies (p > 0.05, I2=0%). This study reported significantly more adverse events than other studies, but we found no systemic design flaws in this study, and there is no reason to exclude it. Two studies reported zero adverse events, which is also far behind the others [40, 47]. Publication bias is likely from the funnel plot (Fig. 7).

Fig. 6
figure 6

Forest plot of comparison: adverse events

Full size image
Fig. 7
figure 7

Funnel plot of comparison: adverse events

Full size image

Discussion

The results provide a new understanding of the effectiveness of BoNT injection on sialorrhea with PD.

Compared with a placebo, BoNT significantly reduced the DSFS of sialorrhea in PD patients. The recommended evidence level is high in terms of FESF score improvement. Consider that physical therapy for PD is short-term benefits and time consuming [48]. Other oral anticholinergics may have significant side effects. Therefore, BoNT may be a better choice. If the patient is well informed, BoNT can be recommended for salivary patients with PD. However, the small sample size and the occurrence of coupling events should arouse our attention. The included studies measured results after one month, and one study measured results within one week [40]. The different dosages of all of these studies also contributed to greater heterogeneity in the comparison. One study did not show statistically significant changes in DSFS scores before and after treatment, but its sample size was small [37]. There were also three studies that did not directly publish the DSFS scores of the BoNT and placebo groups after treatment, which could also lead to errors in the pooled analysis [37, 40, 46].

Injection positioning includes ultrasound guidance, and anatomic positioning [49]. Wolfgang H. Jost [50] believes that ultrasonic guidance is safer and that the operation speed is not slowed down. Amanda Amrita Lakraj [2] and colleagues used nine points of refraction on one side of the face. However, there is a lack of comparison of therapeutic effects with different localization methods. The 200 U Botulinum Toxin A group had the largest decrease in saliva before 24 weeks compared to 100 U [51]. There are few studies on the relationship between dose and efficacy of BoNT.

We are very concerned about the adverse effects of BoNT injection for the treatment of sialorrhea in PD. The incidence of adverse events in the treatment group was higher than that in the placebo group, but the adverse events were mild. And the heterogeneity between studies was high. Dry mouth was the most common adverse event, with worsening gait, diarrhea, difficulty swallowing, neck pain, and weak chewing reported, with recovery time ranging from one to six weeks. Some studies have serious adverse events in both the treatment and placebo groups, although the final analysis may not be relevant to the treatment. Atrial fibrillation, urinary sepsis, and rectal bleeding were more serious adverse events in the treatment group. Congestive heart failure, dyspnea, pneumonia, and other symptoms occurred in the placebo group [45]. BoNT injection is a minimally invasive procedure, and it remains to be seen whether the procedure itself will affect the patient. Although the conclusion is not related to treatment, it should arouse our attention.

Although both types A and B are used in salivary therapy, they both work by blocking acetylcholine [27]. Saliva secretion is reduced, and the patient's sialorrhea symptoms improve. Saliva is secreted at 1 to 1.5 L per day and plays an important role in the oral, digestive, immune, and internal environmental systems. If you reduce the secretion of saliva, these areas will have an impact. Treatment with botulinum toxin can worsen dry mouth, dysphagia, gait, and weakness [52]. Studies have shown that long-term use of BoNT injection can reduce the size of salivary glands as measured by ultrasound [53]. We should also care about oral health and increase the frequency of dental visits [49]. Many animal studies show that repeated injections of toxins can lead to cumulative muscle atrophy [54]. Follow-up should be extended to determine whether prolonged treatment will lead to increased dysphagia and oral health deterioration. Omar R. Tumilasci’s [52] research indicated that basal and reflex salivary secretion is reduced in PD. Sialorrhea in PD is caused by dysphagia rather than excessive salivation. Whether we can treat salivation by improving swallowing function with BoNT instead of injecting it into salivary glands. In the future, we should continue to study the mechanism of botulinum toxin in the treatment of sialorrhea. There are still many problems to be discussed in the treatment of Parkinson's sialorrhea.

Strengths and limitations of this study

Sialorrhea can be caused by various diseases. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze sialorrhea in PD patients. The data from some small clinical randomized controlled trials and crossover trials are pooled into larger samples to provide evidence for clinical application. At the same time, the adverse events were objectively evaluated to provide a basis for the treatment of PD sialorrhea with botulinum toxin. However, there are some shortcomings: 1) Fewer studies were included, and the number of patients included in some studies was small; 2) The evaluation results were mainly subjective, with less objective evaluation; 3) Long-term adverse reactions were not followed up; 4) This study does not negate the use of botulinum toxin in Parkinson's sialorrhea, but it will allow more researchers to study the mechanism and pay attention to the side effects. 5) The effect of BoNT on sialorrhea may be related to the disease itself, and our study is only a small part of many diseases.

Conclusion

There was no statistically significant difference in efficacy between Botulinum toxin A and Botulinum toxin B. Many studies now show that Botulinum toxin has value in treating Parkinson-related saliva, while others suggest that it is less effective. The COE of efficacy was high. However, the level of evidence for safety is low. No serious adverse events directly related to botulinum toxin have been reported. But we also have to pay attention to adverse events. However, there were significant differences in mild adverse events. Therefore, larger samples and more scientifically designed randomized controlled trials are needed to explore the safety of botulinum toxin as a potential alternative treatment for sialorrhea caused by PD. We should also pay attention to the dose, duration, and duration of action of botulinum toxin. More attention should be given to the pathological mechanism of sialorrhea in PD.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this publication

Abbreviations

AEs:

adverse events

BoNT:

botulinum toxin

COE:

certainty of evidence

CI:

Confidence interval

DSFS:

Drooling severity frequency scale

GRADE:

Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation

NMS:

Non-motor symptoms

PD:

Parkinson's disease

PRISMA:

the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses

RCTs:

randomized controlled trials

RDs:

Risk differences

SMD:

Standardized mean difference

WOS:

Web Of science

References

  1. Garnock-Jones KP. Glycopyrrolate oral solution: for chronic, severe drooling in pediatric patients with neurologic conditions. Paediatr Drugs. 2012;14(4):263–9. https://doi.org/10.2165/11208120-000000000-00000.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lakraj AA, Moghimi N, Jabbari B. Sialorrhea: Anatomy, Pathophysiology and Treatment with Emphasis on the Role of Botulinum Toxins. Toxins. 2013;5(5):1010–31. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins5051010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Calim OF, Hassouna HNH, Yildirim YS, Dogan R, Ozturan O. Pediatric Sialorrhea: Submandibular Duct Rerouting and Intraparotid Botulinum Toxin A Injection With Literature Review. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2019;128(2):104–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003489418808305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McGeachan AJ, McDermott CJ. Management of oral secretions in neurological disease. Pract Neurol. 2017;17(2):96–103. https://doi.org/10.1136/practneurol-2016-001515.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hallett M. Mechanism of action of botulinum neurotoxin: Unexpected consequences. Toxicon. 2018;147:73–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxicon.2017.08.011.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rossow H, Kinnunen PM, Nikkari S. Botulinum toxin as a biological weapon. Duodecim. 2012;128(16):1678–84 PMID: 23025151.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Jankovic J. Botulinum toxin: State of the art. Mov Disord. 2017;32(8):1131–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.27072.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Isaacson SH, Ondo W, Jackson CE, Trosch RM, Molho E, Pagan F, et al. Safety and Efficacy of RimabotulinumtoxinB for Treatment of Sialorrhea in Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2020;77(4):461–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4565.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Sridharan K, Sivaramakrishnan G. Pharmacological interventions for treating sialorrhea associated with neurological disorders: A mixed treatment network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Neurosci. 2018;51:12–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2018.02.011.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jost WH, Baeumer T, Laskawi R, Slawek J, Spittau B, Steffen A, et al. Therapy of Sialorrhea with Botulinum Neurotoxin. Neurol Therapy. 2019;8(2):273–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40120-019-00155-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yu YC, Chung CC, Tu YK, Hong CT, Chen KH, Tam KW, et al. Efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin for treating sialorrhea: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Neurol. 2022;29(1):69–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.15083.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dorsey ER, Sherer T, Okun MS, Bloem BR. The Emerging Evidence of the Parkinson Pandemic. J Parkinsons Dis. 2018;8(s1):S3-s8. https://doi.org/10.3233/jpg-181474.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Tolosa E, Garrido A, Scholz SW, Poewe W. Challenges in the diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease. Lancet Neurol. 2021;20(5):385–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(21)00030-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Samii A, Nutt JG, Ransom BR. Parkinson’s disease. Lancet. 2004;363(9423):1783–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(04)16305-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tysnes OB, Storstein A. Epidemiology of Parkinson’s disease. J Neural Transm (Vienna). 2017;124(8):901–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-017-1686-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. AlMahadin G, Lotfi A, Zysk E, Siena FL, Carthy MM, Breedon P. Parkinson’s disease: current assessment methods and wearable devices for evaluation of movement disorder motor symptoms - a patient and healthcare professional perspective. BMC Neurol. 2020;20(1):419. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-020-01996-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Dorsey ER, Bloem BR. The Parkinson Pandemic-A Call to Action. JAMA Neurol. 2018;75(1):9–10. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.3299.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chaudhuri KR, Sauerbier A, Rojo JM, Sethi K, Schapira AH, Brown RG, et al. The burden of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease using a self-completed non-motor questionnaire: a simple grading system. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2015;21(3):287–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.parkreldis.2014.12.031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Weintraub D, Aarsland D, Chaudhuri KR, Dobkin RD, Leentjens AF, Rodriguez-Violante M, et al. The neuropsychiatry of Parkinson’s disease: advances and challenges. Lancet Neurol. 2022;21(1):89–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(21)00330-6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Schapira AHV, Chaudhuri KR, Jenner P. Non-motor features of Parkinson disease. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2017;18(7):435–50. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hermanowicz N, Jones SA, Hauser RA. Impact of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease: a PMDAlliance survey. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2019;15:2205–12. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S213917.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Mukhtar S, Imran R, Zaheer M, Tariq H. Frequency of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease presenting to tertiary care centre in Pakistan: an observational, cross-sectional study. Bmj Open. 2018;8(5). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019172.

  23. Khoo TK, Yarnall AJ, Duncan GW, Coleman S, O’Brien JT, Brooks DJ, et al. The spectrum of nonmotor symptoms in early Parkinson disease. Neurology. 2013;80(3):276–81. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31827deb74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Schrag A, Jahanshahi M, Quinn N. What contributes to quality of life in patients with Parkinson’s disease? J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2000;69(3):308–12. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.69.3.308.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Morgante F, Bavikatte G, Anwar F, Mohamed B. The burden of sialorrhoea in chronic neurological conditions: current treatment options and the role of incobotulinumtoxinA (Xeomin®). Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2019;12:1756286419888601. https://doi.org/10.1177/1756286419888601.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Kalf JG, de Swart BJ, Borm GF, Bloem BR, Munneke M. Prevalence and definition of drooling in Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review. J Neurol. 2009;256(9):1391–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-009-5098-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Isaacson J, Patel S, Torres-Yaghi Y, Pagan F. Sialorrhea in Parkinson's Disease. Toxins. 2020;12(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins12110691.

  28. Jost WH. Use of Botulinum Neurotoxin in Parkinson's Disease: A Critical Appraisal. Toxins (Basel). 2021;13(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins13020087.

  29. Bagheri H, Damase-Michel C, Lapeyre-Mestre M, Cismondo S, O’Connell D, Senard JM, et al. A study of salivary secretion in Parkinson’s disease. Clin Neuropharmacol. 1999;22(4):213–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Miller N, Walshe M, Walker RW. Sialorrhea in Parkinson’s disease: prevalence, impact and management strategies. Res Rev Parkinson. 2019;9:17–28. https://doi.org/10.2147/jprls.S177409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Polychronis S, Nasios G, Dardiotis E, Messinis L, Pagano G. Pathophysiology and Symptomatology of Drooling in Parkinson's Disease. Healthcare (Basel). 2022;10(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10030516.

  32. Reynolds H, Miller N, Walker R. Drooling in Parkinson’s Disease: Evidence of a Role for Divided Attention. Dysphagia. 2018;33(6):809–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-018-9906-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Cersosimo MG, Benarroch EE. Pathological correlates of gastrointestinal dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease. Neurobiol Dis. 2012;46(3):559–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2011.10.014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Jankovic J, Tan EK. Parkinson’s disease: etiopathogenesis and treatment. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2020;91(8):795–808. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2019-322338.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ruiz-Roca JA, Pons-Fuster E, Lopez-Jornet P. Effectiveness of the Botulinum Toxin for Treating Sialorrhea in Patients with Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review. J Clin Med. 2019;8(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8030317.

  36. Santos Junior LC, Santos JR, Reis A, Faria ESAL, Leal PC. Effectiveness of the pharmacological treatments for sialorrhea in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-04981-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Narayanaswami P, Tarulli A, Raynor E, Gautam S, Geisbush T, Tarsy D. Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled cross-over study of incobotulinum toxin A for troublesome drooling in Parkinson’s disease (PD). Mov Disord. 2015;30:S203. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.26295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;134:178–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Khodashahi M. Comparison of the therapeutic effects of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in antiphospholipid syndrome: a systematic review. Arch Rheumatol. 2020;35(1):107–16. https://doi.org/10.5606/ArchRheumatol.2020.7375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Mancini F, Zangaglia R, Cristina S, Sommaruga MG, Martignoni E, Nappi G, et al. Double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin type A in the treatment of drooling Parkinsonism. Mov Disord. 2003;18(6):685–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.10420.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Brozek JL, Akl EA, Alonso-Coello P, Lang D, Jaeschke R, Williams JW, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines. Part 1 of 3. An overview of the GRADE approach and grading quality of evidence about interventions. Allergy. 2009;64(5):669–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2009.01973.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ondo WG, Hunter C, Moore W. A double-blind placebo-controlled trial of botulinum toxin B for sialorrhea in Parkinson’s disease. Neurology. 2004;62(1):37–40. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.WNL.0000101713.81253.4C.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Lagalla G, Millevolte M, Capecci M, Provinciali L, Ceravolo MG. Botulinum toxin type A for drooling in Parkinson’s disease: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Mov Disord. 2006;21(5):704–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.20793.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Lagalla G, Millevolte M, Capecci M, Provinciali L, Ceravolo MG. Long-lasting benefits of botulinum toxin type B in Parkinson’s disease-related drooling. J Neurol. 2009;256(4):563–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-009-0085-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Chinnapongse R, Gullo K, Nemeth P, Zhang Y, Griggs L. Safety and efficacy of botulinum toxin type B for treatment of sialorrhea in Parkinson’s disease: A prospective double-blind trial. Mov Disord. 2012;27(2):219–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.23929.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Narayanaswami P, Geisbush T, Tarulli A, Raynor E, Gautam S, Tarsy D, et al. Drooling in Parkinson’s disease: A randomized controlled trial of incobotulinum toxin A and meta-analysis of Botulinum toxins. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2016;30:73–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.parkreldis.2016.07.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Tiigimäe-Saar J, Tamme T, Rosenthal M, Kadastik-Eerme L, Taba P. Saliva changes in Parkinson’s disease patients after injection of Botulinum neurotoxin type A. Neurol Sci. 2018;39(5):871–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-018-3279-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Tomlinson CL, Patel S, Meek C, Herd CP, Clarke CE, Stowe R, et al. Physiotherapy intervention in Parkinson’s disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2012;345: e5004. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e5004.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Ruiz-Roca JA, Pons-Fuster E, Lopez-Jornet P. Effectiveness of the botulinum toxin for treating sialorrhea in patients with parkinson’s disease: A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2019;8(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8030317.

  50. Jost WH. The option of sonographic guidance in Botulinum toxin injection for drooling in Parkinson’s disease. J Neural Transm. 2016;123(1):51–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-015-1416-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Mazlan M, Rajasegaran S, Engkasan JP, Nawawi O, Goh KJ, Freddy SJ. A double-blind randomized controlled trial investigating the most efficacious dose of botulinum toxin-a for sialorrhea treatment in asian adults with neurological diseases. Toxins (Basel). 2015;7(9):3758–70. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins7093758.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Tumilasci OR, Cersósimo MG, Belforte JE, Micheli FE, Benarroch EE, Pazo JH. Quantitative study of salivary secretion in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord. 2006;21(5):660–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.20784.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Cardona I, Saint-Martin C, Daniel SJ. Effect of recurrent onabotulinum toxin A injection into the salivary glands: An ultrasound measurement. Laryngoscope. 2015;125(10):E328–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.25222.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Multani I, Manji J, Tang MJ, Herzog W, Howard JJ, Graham HK. Sarcopenia, cerebral palsy, and botulinum toxin type A. JBJS Rev. 2019;7(8): e4. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.Rvw.18.00153.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Not applicable.

Funding

1. Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China, Grant numbers: National Key R&D Plan/2017YFC1308504

2. Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province, Grant numbers: Project of Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province/2021YJ0184

3. Enshi Prefecture: Guiding Project of Science and Technology Bureau of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture/JCY2019000031.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610041, PR China

    Chun-Lan Yang, Jia-Peng Huang, Ting-ting Wang, Han Zhang & Yun Qu

  2. Minda Hospital of Hubei Minzu University, Enshi, Hubei, 445000, PR China

    Chun-Lan Yang

  3. Key Laboratory of Rehabilitation Medicine in Sichuan Province, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610041, PR China

    Chun-Lan Yang, Jia-Peng Huang, Ting-ting Wang, Han Zhang & Yun Qu

  4. Enshi Prefecture Central Hospital, Enshi, Hubei, 445000, PR China

    Ying-chao Tan

Authors
  1. Chun-Lan Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jia-Peng Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ying-chao Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ting-ting Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Han Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yun Qu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Yun Qu and Chun-Lan YANG conceived and designed this study. Chun-lan YANG, Jia-Peng HUANG, Ying-chao TAN, and Ting-ting WANG contributed to the literature search, study selection, and data extraction. Chun-lan YANG performed data analysis and drafted the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yun Qu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

All the authors agreed to be published

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, CL., Huang, JP., Tan, Yc. et al. The effectiveness and safety of botulinum toxin injections for the treatment of sialorrhea with Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol 24, 52 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40360-023-00694-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40360-023-00694-7

Keywords

BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology

ISSN: 2050-6511

Contact us