• NeuroImage. Clinical · Jan 2020

    Comparative Study

    Arterial spin labeling versus 18F-FDG-PET to identify mild cognitive impairment.

    • Sudipto Dolui, Zhengjun Li, Ilya M Nasrallah, John A Detre, and David A Wolk.
    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
    • Neuroimage Clin. 2020 Jan 1; 25: 102146.

    AbstractNeurodegenerative biomarkers support diagnosis and measurement of disease progression in the Alzheimer's disease (AD) continuum. 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (18F-FDG-PET), which measures glucose metabolism, is one of the most commonly used biomarkers of neurodegeneration, but is expensive and requires exposure to ionizing radiation. Arterial Spin Labeled (ASL) perfusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) provides non invasive quantification of cerebral blood flow (CBF), which is believed to be tightly coupled to glucose metabolism. Here we aimed to compare the performances of ASL derived CBF and 18F-FDG-PET derived standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) in discriminating patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from older Controls. 2D pseudo continuous ASL and 18F-FDG-PET data with adequate scan quality from 50 MCI study participants (age=73.0 ± 7.0 years, 16 female) and 35 older controls (age=70.2 ± 6.9 years, 20 female), acquired in close temporal proximity, usually on the same day, were considered for this study. We assessed Control-patient group differences both at voxel level and within a priori regions of interest (ROIs). We also compared their area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) with mean CBF or SUVR in a priori selected posterior cingulate cortex (PCC). CBF and 18F-FDG-PET showed abnormalities in similar areas, particularly in medial temporoparietal regions, consistent with the typically observed pattern of prodromal AD. The hypoperfusion pattern with relative CBF (obtained by normalizing voxel CBF values with mean CBF in putamen) was more localized than with absolute CBF. Pearson's correlation coefficients between the T-scores corresponding to the group-differences obtained with 18F-FDG-PET SUVR and absolute and relative ASL CBF were 0.46 and 0.43 (p<0.001), respectively. ROI analyses were also consistent, with the strongest differences observed in PCC (p<0.01). 18F-FDG-PET SUVR, absolute and relative CBF in the PCC ROI demonstrated moderate and similar discriminatory power in predicting MCI status with AUC of 0.71 ± 0.12, 0.77 ± 0.12 and 0.74 ± 0.13, respectively. In conclusion, ASL CBF may be a reasonable, less expensive and safer substitute for 18F-FDG-PET in clinical research.Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…