Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
PurposeWe aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performances of quantitative indices obtained from dopamine transporter (DAT) single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scintigraphy for Parkinsonian syndromes (PS) using the classification and regression tree (CART) analysis.MethodsWe retrospectively enrolled 216 patients with or without PS, including 80 without PS (NPS) and 136 with PS [90 Parkinson's disease (PD), 21 dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), 16 progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), and 9 multiple system atrophy (MSA). The striatal binding ratio (SBR), putamen-to-caudate ratio (PCR), and asymmetry index (AI) were calculated using DAT SPECT. The heart-to-mediastinum uptake ratio (H/M) based on the early (H/M [Early]) and delayed (H/M [Delay]) images and cardiac washout rate (WR) were calculated from MIBG scintigraphy. The CART analysis was used to establish a diagnostic decision tree model for differentiating PS based on these quantitative indices.ResultsThe sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 87.5, 96.3, 93.3, 92.9, and 93.1 for NPS; 91.1, 78.6, 75.2, 92.5, and 83.8 for PD; 57.1, 95.9, 60.0, 95.4, and 92.1 for DLB; and 50.0, 98.0, 66.7, 96.1, and 94.4 for PSP, respectively. The PCR, WR, H/M (Delay), and SBR indices played important roles in the optimal decision tree model, and their feature importance was 0.61, 0.22, 0.11, and 0.05, respectively.ConclusionThe quantitative indices showed high diagnostic performances in differentiating NPS, PD, DLB, and PSP, but not MSA. Our findings provide useful guidance on how to apply these quantitative indices in clinical practice.
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.