Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29159053›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2018

Using simultaneous PET/MRI to compare the accuracy of diagnosing frontotemporal dementia by arterial spin labelling MRI and FDG-PET.

Udunna C Anazodo, Elizabeth Finger, Benjamin Yin Ming Kwan, William Pavlosky, James Claude Warrington, Matthias Günther, Frank S Prato, Jonathan D Thiessen, Keith S St Lawrence

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Synaptic density imaging in behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia: A comparison ofAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Udunna C AnazodoLawson Health Research Institute, St Joseph's Health Care, 268 Grosvenor St., London, Ontario N6A 4V2, Canada; Department of Medical Biophysics, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, Medical Sciences Building, Rm M407, London, Ontario N6A 5C1, Canada. Electronic address: uanazodo@lawsonimaging.ca.
Elizabeth FingerDepartment of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Western University, 339 Windermere Road, London, Ontario N6A 5A5, Canada. Electronic address: Elizabeth.Finger@lhsc.on.ca.
Benjamin Yin Ming KwanDepartment of Medical Imaging, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario N6A 5W9, Canada.
William PavloskyLawson Health Research Institute, St Joseph's Health Care, 268 Grosvenor St., London, Ontario N6A 4V2, Canada; Department of Medical Imaging, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario N6A 5W9, Canada. Electronic address: William.Pavlosky@lawsonimaging.ca.
James Claude WarringtonDepartment of Medical Imaging, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario N6A 5W9, Canada. Electronic address: bkwan3@uwo.ca.
Matthias GüntherFraunhofer Institute for Medical Image Computing MEVIS, Am Fallturm 1, 28359 Bremen, Germany.; University Bremen, Faculty 1, Otto-Hahn-Allee 1, 28359 Bremen, Germany. Electronic address: Matthias.guenther@mevis.fraunhofer.de.
Frank S PratoLawson Health Research Institute, St Joseph's Health Care, 268 Grosvenor St., London, Ontario N6A 4V2, Canada; Department of Medical Biophysics, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, Medical Sciences Building, Rm M407, London, Ontario N6A 5C1, Canada. Electronic address: prato@lawsonimaging.ca.
Jonathan D ThiessenLawson Health Research Institute, St Joseph's Health Care, 268 Grosvenor St., London, Ontario N6A 4V2, Canada; Department of Medical Biophysics, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, Medical Sciences Building, Rm M407, London, Ontario N6A 5C1, Canada. Electronic address: jthiessen@lawsonimaging.ca.
Keith S St LawrenceLawson Health Research Institute, St Joseph's Health Care, 268 Grosvenor St., London, Ontario N6A 4V2, Canada; Department of Medical Biophysics, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, Medical Sciences Building, Rm M407, London, Ontario N6A 5C1, Canada. Electronic address: kstlaw@lawsonimaging.ca.
Western University · CASt Joseph's Health Care · CALawson Health Research Institute · CAUniversity of Bremen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe clinical utility of FDG-PET in diagnosing frontotemporal dementia (FTD) has been well demonstrated over the past decades. On the contrary, the diagnostic value of arterial spin labelling (ASL) MRI - a relatively new technique - in clinical diagnosis of FTD has yet to be confirmed. Using simultaneous PET/MRI, we evaluated the diagnostic performance of ASL in identifying pathological abnormalities in FTD (FTD) to determine whether ASL can provide similar diagnostic value as FDG-PET.

methodsASL and FDG-PET images were compared in 10 patients with FTD and 10 healthy older adults. Qualitative and quantitative measures of diagnostic equivalency were used to determine the diagnostic utility of ASL compared to FDG-PET. Sensitivity, specificity, and inter-rater reliability were calculated for each modality from scores of subjective visual ratings and from analysis of regional mean values in thirteen a priori regions of interest (ROI). To determine the extent of concordance between modalities in each patient, individual statistical maps generated from comparison of each patient to controls were compared between modalities using the Jaccard similarity index (JI).

resultsVisual assessments revealed lower sensitivity, specificity and inter-rater reliability for ASL (66.67%/62.12%/0.2) compared to FDG-PET (88.43%/90.91%/0.61). Across all regions, ASL performed lower than FDG-PET in discriminating patients from controls (areas under the receiver operating curve: ASL = 0.75 and FDG-PET = 0.87). In all patients, ASL identified patterns of reduced perfusion consistent with FTD, but areas of hypometabolism exceeded hypoperfused areas (group-mean JI = 0.30 ± 0.22).

conclusionThis pilot study demonstrated that ASL can detect similar spatial patterns of abnormalities in individual FTD patients compared to FDG-PET, but its sensitivity and specificity for discriminant diagnosis of a patient from healthy individuals remained unmatched to FDG-PET. Further studies at the individual level are required to confirm the clinical role of ASL in FTD management.

Indexed as

AgedBrainFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18Frontotemporal DementiaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedObserver VariationPilot ProjectsPositron-Emission TomographySensitivity and SpecificitySpin LabelsFluorodeoxyglucose F18Spin LabelsArterial spin labelling MRIFDG-PETFrontotemporal dementiaHybrid PET/MRI

Identifiers

PMID29159053
PMCPMC5683801
OpenAlexW2766785061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.