Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundDopamine transporter based imaging has high diagnostic performance in distinguishing patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) from patients with non-Parkinsonian syndromes. Our previous study indicated that the "Sniffin' Sticks" odor identification test (SS-16) acts as a valid instrument for olfactory assessment in Chinese PD patients. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of the two methods in diagnosing PD.MethodsFifty-two PD patients were involved in this study and underwent single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging using the labeled dopamine transporter radiotracer (99m)Tc-TRODAT-1 to assess nigrostriatal dopaminergic function. Olfactory function was assessed with the "Sniffin' Sticks" odor identification test (SS-16) in all patients who received DAT-SPECT scanning. Statistical analysis (SPSS version 21) was carried out to determine the diagnostic accuracy of SS-16 as well as its correlation with (99m)Tc-TRODAT-1 SPECT, its positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV).ResultsWe identified a negative correlation between SS-16 and DAT SPECT (Kappa = 0.269, p = 0.004). By using the (99m)Tc-TRODAT-1 uptake results as the gold standard, the sensitivity and specificity of SS-16 was 56.8 and 37.5 %, respectively. Furthermore, the negative and positive predictive values were calculated as 13.6 and 83.3 %, respectively.ConclusionsSS-16 would not be used as a diagnostic tool for early stage PD patients. Negative results of SS-16 would not exclude the diagnosis of PD. Further tests are needed for validation.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.