Combined Use of 123i-fp-cit Spect and 123i-mibg Scintigraphy for Differentiation of Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Subtypes and Parkinson's

Research overview

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

Abstract Background:This study was undertaken to investigate the utility of 123I-ioflupane (123I-FP-CIT) single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (123I-MIBG) scintigraphy and both of these to differentiate among progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), including typical cases and other subtypes, and Parkinson’s disease (PD).Methods: Twenty-five patients with typical PSP (Richardson's syndrome; PSP-RS), 14 atypical ones (PSP-variants; PSP-V) and 42 PD who underwent both 23I-FP-CIT SPECT and 123I-MIBG scintigraphy within short intervals were enrolled. Speciﬁc binding ratio (SBR) of the striatum and midbrain and anteroposterior and asymmetry ratio of the striatal SBR on 123I-FP-CIT SPECT and heart-to-mediastinum (H/M) ratio and washout rate (WR) on 123I-MIBG scintigraphy were used as quantitative measures. The classifier performance based on adaptive boosting was evaluated using five-fold cross-validation for these measures.Results: Midbrain SBR and the striatal anteroposterior ratio were statistically lower in PSP-RS than PD. On the other hand, there were no significant differences in any other quantitative measures among PSP-RS, PSP-V and PD. Striatal and midbrain SBRs and anteroposterior ratio of PSP-V were approximately in-between those of PSP-RS and PD. PD showed the lowest early and delayed H/M ratios and highest WR of any group. The combination of 123I-FP-CIT and 123I-MIBG was useful in discriminating PSP-RS and PSP-V from PD, while 123I-FP-CIT was superior to 123I-MIBG in differentiating PSP-RS from PSP-V.Conclusion: The combination of 123I-FP-CIT SPECT and 123I-MIBG scintigraphy, rather than either alone, may be a useful differential diagnostic tool to differentiate patients with PSP-RS, PSP-V and PD.

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.