Clinical utility of FDG-PET for the differential diagnosis among the main forms of dementia

PJ Nestor, D Altomare, C Festari, A Drzezga, J Rivolta, Z Walker, F Bouwman, S Orini, I Law, F Agosta, J Arbizu, M Boccardi, F Nobili, GB Frisoni

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aim: To assess the clinical utility of FDG-PET as a diagnostic aid for differentiating Alzheimer’s disease (AD; both typical and atypical forms), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), vascular dementia (VaD) and non-degenerative pseudodementia. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PICO model to extract evidence from relevant studies. An expert panel then voted on six different diagnostic scenarios using the Delphi method. Results: The level of empirical study evidence for the use of FDG-PET was considered good for the discrimination of DLB and AD; fair for discriminating FTLD from AD; poor for atypical AD; and lacking for discriminating DLB from FTLD, AD from VaD, and for pseudodementia. Delphi voting led to consensus in all scenarios within two iterations. Panellists supported the use of FDG-PET for all PICOs—including those where study evidence was poor or lacking—based on its negative predictive value and on the assistance it provides when typical patterns of hypometabolism for a given diagnosis are observed. Conclusion: Although there is an overall lack of evidence on which to base strong recommendations, it was generally concluded that FDG-PET has a diagnostic role in all scenarios. Prospective studies targeting diagnostically uncertain patients for assessing the added value of FDG-PET would be highly desirable. © 2018 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1509-1525
Number of pages17
JournalEuropean Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Volume45
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration
Lewy Body Disease
Factitious Disorders
Dementia
Vascular Dementia
Differential Diagnosis
Politics
Germany
Consensus
Alzheimer Disease
Prospective Studies

Cite this

Clinical utility of FDG-PET for the differential diagnosis among the main forms of dementia. / Nestor, PJ; Altomare, D; Festari, C; Drzezga, A; Rivolta, J; Walker, Z; Bouwman, F; Orini, S; Law, I; Agosta, F; Arbizu, J; Boccardi, M; Nobili, F; Frisoni, GB.

In: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Vol. 45, No. 9, 2018, p. 1509-1525.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Nestor, PJ, Altomare, D, Festari, C, Drzezga, A, Rivolta, J, Walker, Z, Bouwman, F, Orini, S, Law, I, Agosta, F, Arbizu, J, Boccardi, M, Nobili, F & Frisoni, GB 2018, 'Clinical utility of FDG-PET for the differential diagnosis among the main forms of dementia', European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 1509-1525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-4035-y
Nestor, PJ ; Altomare, D ; Festari, C ; Drzezga, A ; Rivolta, J ; Walker, Z ; Bouwman, F ; Orini, S ; Law, I ; Agosta, F ; Arbizu, J ; Boccardi, M ; Nobili, F ; Frisoni, GB. / Clinical utility of FDG-PET for the differential diagnosis among the main forms of dementia. In: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2018 ; Vol. 45, No. 9. pp. 1509-1525.
@article{3c72ab9555d4412592158482e46b245f,
title = "Clinical utility of FDG-PET for the differential diagnosis among the main forms of dementia",
abstract = "Aim: To assess the clinical utility of FDG-PET as a diagnostic aid for differentiating Alzheimer’s disease (AD; both typical and atypical forms), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), vascular dementia (VaD) and non-degenerative pseudodementia. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PICO model to extract evidence from relevant studies. An expert panel then voted on six different diagnostic scenarios using the Delphi method. Results: The level of empirical study evidence for the use of FDG-PET was considered good for the discrimination of DLB and AD; fair for discriminating FTLD from AD; poor for atypical AD; and lacking for discriminating DLB from FTLD, AD from VaD, and for pseudodementia. Delphi voting led to consensus in all scenarios within two iterations. Panellists supported the use of FDG-PET for all PICOs—including those where study evidence was poor or lacking—based on its negative predictive value and on the assistance it provides when typical patterns of hypometabolism for a given diagnosis are observed. Conclusion: Although there is an overall lack of evidence on which to base strong recommendations, it was generally concluded that FDG-PET has a diagnostic role in all scenarios. Prospective studies targeting diagnostically uncertain patients for assessing the added value of FDG-PET would be highly desirable. {\circledC} 2018 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature",
author = "PJ Nestor and D Altomare and C Festari and A Drzezga and J Rivolta and Z Walker and F Bouwman and S Orini and I Law and F Agosta and J Arbizu and M Boccardi and F Nobili and GB Frisoni",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1007/s00259-018-4035-y",
language = "English",
volume = "45",
pages = "1509--1525",
journal = "European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging",
issn = "1619-7070",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical utility of FDG-PET for the differential diagnosis among the main forms of dementia

AU - Nestor, PJ

AU - Altomare, D

AU - Festari, C

AU - Drzezga, A

AU - Rivolta, J

AU - Walker, Z

AU - Bouwman, F

AU - Orini, S

AU - Law, I

AU - Agosta, F

AU - Arbizu, J

AU - Boccardi, M

AU - Nobili, F

AU - Frisoni, GB

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Aim: To assess the clinical utility of FDG-PET as a diagnostic aid for differentiating Alzheimer’s disease (AD; both typical and atypical forms), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), vascular dementia (VaD) and non-degenerative pseudodementia. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PICO model to extract evidence from relevant studies. An expert panel then voted on six different diagnostic scenarios using the Delphi method. Results: The level of empirical study evidence for the use of FDG-PET was considered good for the discrimination of DLB and AD; fair for discriminating FTLD from AD; poor for atypical AD; and lacking for discriminating DLB from FTLD, AD from VaD, and for pseudodementia. Delphi voting led to consensus in all scenarios within two iterations. Panellists supported the use of FDG-PET for all PICOs—including those where study evidence was poor or lacking—based on its negative predictive value and on the assistance it provides when typical patterns of hypometabolism for a given diagnosis are observed. Conclusion: Although there is an overall lack of evidence on which to base strong recommendations, it was generally concluded that FDG-PET has a diagnostic role in all scenarios. Prospective studies targeting diagnostically uncertain patients for assessing the added value of FDG-PET would be highly desirable. © 2018 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature

AB - Aim: To assess the clinical utility of FDG-PET as a diagnostic aid for differentiating Alzheimer’s disease (AD; both typical and atypical forms), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), vascular dementia (VaD) and non-degenerative pseudodementia. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PICO model to extract evidence from relevant studies. An expert panel then voted on six different diagnostic scenarios using the Delphi method. Results: The level of empirical study evidence for the use of FDG-PET was considered good for the discrimination of DLB and AD; fair for discriminating FTLD from AD; poor for atypical AD; and lacking for discriminating DLB from FTLD, AD from VaD, and for pseudodementia. Delphi voting led to consensus in all scenarios within two iterations. Panellists supported the use of FDG-PET for all PICOs—including those where study evidence was poor or lacking—based on its negative predictive value and on the assistance it provides when typical patterns of hypometabolism for a given diagnosis are observed. Conclusion: Although there is an overall lack of evidence on which to base strong recommendations, it was generally concluded that FDG-PET has a diagnostic role in all scenarios. Prospective studies targeting diagnostically uncertain patients for assessing the added value of FDG-PET would be highly desirable. © 2018 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature

U2 - 10.1007/s00259-018-4035-y

DO - 10.1007/s00259-018-4035-y

M3 - Article

VL - 45

SP - 1509

EP - 1525

JO - European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

JF - European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

SN - 1619-7070

IS - 9

ER -