SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Diagnostic accuracy of dual-phase <sup>18</sup>F-FP-CIT PET imaging for detection and differential diagnosis of Parkinsonism.

Sci Rep · 2021-07-22

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-94040-8PMID: 34294739

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Delayed phase 18F-FP-CIT PET (dCIT) can assess the striatal dopamine transporter binding to detect degenerative parkinsonism (DP). Early phase 18F-FP-CIT (eCIT) can assess the regional brain activity for differential diagnosis among parkinsonism similar with 18F-FDG PET. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of dual phase 18F-FP-CIT PET (dual CIT) and 18F-FDG PET compared with clinical diagnosis in 141 subjects [36 with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (IPD), 77 with multiple system atrophy (MSA), 18 with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), and 10 with non-DP)]. Visual assessment of eCIT, dCIT, dual CIT, 18F-FDG and 18F-FDG PET with dCIT was in agreement with the clinical diagnosis in 61.7%, 69.5%, 95.7%, 81.6%, and 97.2% of cases, respectively. ECIT showed about 90% concordance with non-DP and MSA, and 8.3% and 27.8% with IPD and PSP, respectively. DCIT showed ≥ 88% concordance with non-DP, IPD, and PSP, and 49.4% concordance with MSA. Dual CIT showed ≥ 90% concordance in all groups. 18F-FDG PET showed ≥ 90% concordance with non-DP, MSA, and PSP, but only 33.3% concordance with IPD. The combination of 18F-FDG and dCIT yielded ≥ 90% concordance in all groups. Dual CIT may represent a powerful alternative to the combination of 18F-FDG PET and dCIT for differential diagnosis of parkinsonian disorders.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.