Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
6.9
3.8
Journals
Diagnostics
Special Issues
Diagnostic Imaging in Neurological Diseases: 2nd Edition
share announcement

Diagnostic Imaging in Neurological Diseases: 2nd Edition

A special issue of Diagnostics (ISSN 2075-4418). This special issue belongs to the section "Medical Imaging and Theranostics".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 July 2026 | Viewed by 1778

Editor

Dr. Daniele Coraci

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Neuroscience, Section of Rehabilitation, University of Padova, 35121 Padua, Italy
Interests: ultrasound imaging; neurological diseases; diagnostic imaging; neurophysiology; ultrasonography; neurology; neuroimaging; movement analysis; trauma; clinical neurology
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

“Diagnostic Imaging in Neurological Diseases: 2nd Edition” will represent a pivotal publication focusing on the diagnostic role of various imaging techniques in neurological disorders. The first section of this Special Issue of Diagnostics will delve into the fundamental physics and potential complications associated with available diagnostic modalities. This foundational knowledge can serve as a crucial basis for understanding subsequent discussions on the application of these imaging techniques.

The remainder of the publication will be dedicated to exploring various signs and symptoms of central nervous system abnormalities through diagnostic imaging. Taking a conservative approach, authors should emphasize the importance of considering the accuracy, necessity, and patient benefits of each diagnostic test, weighing them up against the risks, time, and costs involved. This balanced perspective will allow for a nuanced exploration of the practical and ethical considerations involved in utilizing diagnostic imaging for neurological diseases.

Dr. Daniele Coraci
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 250 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for assessment.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-anonymized peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Diagnostics is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • diagnostic imaging
  • neurological diseases/disorders
  • central nervous system
  • imaging techniques
  • magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
  • positron emission tomography (PET)
  • diagnostic modalities

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Related Special Issue

Published Papers (2 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Other

19 pages, 8071 KB  
Systematic Review
Oculomotor Nerve Palsy—Etiologies, Symptoms and Diagnosis: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis
by Konstantina Bolou, George Triantafyllou, Nikolaos-Achilleas Arkoudis, Panagiotis Papadopoulos-Manolarakis, Irini Chatziralli, Vasileios Papadopoulos, Georgios Velonakis and Maria Piagkou
Diagnostics 2026, 16(9), 1401; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics16091401 - 6 May 2026
Viewed by 625
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Oculomotor nerve palsy (OMNP) is a clinically significant condition that may represent the earliest manifestation of life-threatening intracranial pathology, particularly aneurysmal compression or neoplasia. Despite its neurosurgical relevance, comprehensive meta-analytic evidence synthesizing OMNP etiologies, clinical presentation, and contemporary diagnostic pathways remains limited. [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Oculomotor nerve palsy (OMNP) is a clinically significant condition that may represent the earliest manifestation of life-threatening intracranial pathology, particularly aneurysmal compression or neoplasia. Despite its neurosurgical relevance, comprehensive meta-analytic evidence synthesizing OMNP etiologies, clinical presentation, and contemporary diagnostic pathways remains limited. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched for studies reporting quantitative data on OMNP. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects models for causes and symptoms, while a structured narrative synthesis was performed for diagnostic modalities because outcome reporting was heterogeneous and unsuitable for meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) risk of bias tool. Results: Twenty-four studies involving 5541 patients were included. Using a multivariate multilevel model to account for within-study dependence, the most common etiological category was vascular disorders (35.62%), followed by idiopathic (16.47%) and neoplastic (12.10%). Head trauma and aneurysms accounted for 11.26% and 10.08% of cases, respectively. Diplopia (60.63%) and ptosis (54.12%) remained the predominant clinical symptoms, while pupil involvement was identified in 40.62% of the pooled population. Diagnostic paradigms have shifted decisively toward non-invasive neuroimaging, with magnetic resonance imaging reported in 66% of included studies and magnetic resonance or computed tomographic angiography increasingly employed to identify surgically relevant vascular lesions. Conclusions: Although vascular disorders represented the most common etiological category, the notable prevalence of aneurysmal and neoplastic causes underscores the importance of prompt high-resolution neuroimaging and early neurosurgical assessment. Early recognition and etiological stratification remain essential to optimize management and prevent irreversible neurological morbidity. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diagnostic Imaging in Neurological Diseases: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 510 KB  
Systematic Review
Diagnostic Limitations, Patient Characteristics, and Confounding Factors Impacting Neurotologic Lesion Imaging: A Systematic Review
by Diana Hamdan, Precious Ochuwa Imokhai, Alexandra Konvalina, BaoKhanh Nguyen, Maha Alhoda, Valentina Alejandra Da Silva Acosta, Waseem Syed and Amanda Brooks
Diagnostics 2026, 16(3), 446; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics16030446 - 1 Feb 2026
Viewed by 824
Abstract
Background: Neuroimaging protocols for neurotologic disease are often developed without consideration of patient-specific factors such as biological differences, clinical presentation variability, and comorbidities. This lack of tailored design contributes to insufficient detection, delayed diagnosis, and inappropriate treatment. Objectives: To critically examine [...] Read more.
Background: Neuroimaging protocols for neurotologic disease are often developed without consideration of patient-specific factors such as biological differences, clinical presentation variability, and comorbidities. This lack of tailored design contributes to insufficient detection, delayed diagnosis, and inappropriate treatment. Objectives: To critically examine the literature on diagnostic limitations of neuroimaging for neurotologic lesions and identify gaps in protocol validation, accuracy, and clinical translation. Methods: A systematic review of PubMed and Google Scholar was conducted, focusing on studies published between 2015 and 2025 that evaluated diagnostic imaging outcomes in patients with neurotologic lesions. Eligible studies included prospective cohorts, retrospective analyses, and consensus statements. Outcomes of interest included the sensitivity and specificity of imaging modalities, prevalence of misdiagnosis, and the influence of biological, anatomical, and clinical variability on diagnostic performance. Results: The literature demonstrates that neurotologic disorders are frequently associated with diagnostic challenges, including atypical clinical presentations, overlapping symptoms, and stroke mimics, which complicate image interpretation. Standard magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols often miss subtle or early ischemic changes, resulting in delayed intervention. Few studies stratify outcomes by patient characteristics, and most protocols were developed in generalized populations without comprehensive validation. Evidence on advanced imaging modalities (positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), high-resolution MRI) remains limited, and large-scale prospective studies addressing diagnostic accuracy gaps are lacking. In summary, a total of 27 studies met inclusion criteria. Conclusions: Current neuroimaging methods are insufficiently validated across diverse patient populations, contributing to the underdiagnosis and mismanagement of neurotologic disease. Improved diagnostic accuracy will require large-scale, prospective research, standardized outcome reporting, and imaging protocols designed to account for patient-specific variability. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diagnostic Imaging in Neurological Diseases: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-2
Back to TopTop