Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24646878›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

Clinical utility of SPECT neuroimaging in the diagnosis and treatment of traumatic brain injury: a systematic review.

Cyrus A Raji, Robert Tarzwell, Dan Pavel, Howard Schneider, Michael Uszler, John Thornton, Muriel van Lierop, Phil Cohen, Daniel G Amen, Theodore Henderson

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE-5) Inhibitors as Therapy for Cerebrovascular Dysfunction in Chronic Traumatic Brain Injury.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Application-specific nuclear medicalPhysics in medicine and biology · 2021
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Cyrus A RajiUCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Robert TarzwellUniversity of British Columbia School of Medicine, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Dan PavelPathFinder Brain SPECT, Deerfield, Illinois, United States of America.
Howard SchneiderSheppard Associates, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Michael UszlerSt. Johns Health Center, Santa Monica, California, United States of America.
John ThorntonRossiter-Thornton Associates, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Muriel van LieropPrivate Practice, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Phil CohenLions Gate Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Daniel G AmenAmen Clinics, Inc., Newport Beach, California, United States of America.
Theodore HendersonThe Synaptic Space, Denver, Colorado, United States of America.
Amen Clinics · USDeerfield (United States) · USLions Gate Hospital · CASt. John's School · USSynaptic Research (United States) · USUCLA Medical Center · USUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis systematic review evaluated the clinical utility of single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) in traumatic brain injury (TBI).

methodsAfter defining a PICO Statement (Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome Statement), PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) criteria were applied to identify 1600 articles. After screening, 374 articles were eligible for review. Inclusion for review was focus on SPECT in the setting of mild, moderate, or severe TBI with cerebral lobar specificity of SPECT findings. Other inclusion criteria were comparison modalities in the same subjects and articles in English. Foreign language articles, SPECT studies that did not include comparison modalities, and case reports were not included for review.

resultsWe identified 19 longitudinal and 52 cross-sectional studies meeting inclusion criteria. Three longitudinal studies examined diagnostic predictive value. The first showed positive predictive value increases from initial SPECT scan shortly after trauma to one year follow up scans, from 59% to 95%. Subsequent work replicated these results in a larger cohort. Longitudinal and cross sectional studies demonstrated SPECT lesion localization not detected by CT or MRI. The most commonly abnormal regions revealed by SPECT in cross-sectional studies were frontal (94%) and temporal (77%) lobes. SPECT was found to outperform both CT and MRI in both acute and chronic imaging of TBI, particularly mild TBI. It was also found to have a near 100% negative predictive value.

conclusionsThis review demonstrates Level IIA evidence (at least one non-randomized controlled trial) for the value of SPECT in TBI. Given its advantages over CT and MRI in the detection of mild TBI in numerous studies of adequate quality, and given its excellent negative predictive value, it may be an important second test in settings where CT or MRI are negative after a closed head injury with post-injury neurological or psychiatric symptoms.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultBrain InjuriesChildChild, PreschoolCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansHyperbaric OxygenationLongitudinal StudiesMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeuroimagingTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon

Identifiers

PMID24646878
PMCPMC3960124
OpenAlexW2038910549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.