4.2 Review

Diagnostic Performance of Myocardial Innervation Imaging Using MIBG Scintigraphy in Differential Diagnosis between Dementia with Lewy Bodies and Other Dementias: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROIMAGING
Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages 111-117

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1552-6569.2010.00532.x

Keywords

MIBG; metaiodobenzylguanidine; dementia with Lewy bodies; dementia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE This study was designed to review the diagnostic performance of myocardial innervation imaging using iodine-123-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scintigraphy in differential diagnosis between dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and other dementias. METHODS A comprehensive computer literature search of studies published through May 2010 regarding MIBG scintigraphy in patients with DLB was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases. Only studies in which MIBG scintigraphy was performed for differential diagnosis between DLB and other dementias were selected. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of MIBG scintigraphy were presented with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The area under the ROC curve was calculated to measure the accuracy of MIBG scintigraphy in differential diagnosis between Lewy body diseases and other dementias. RESULTS Ultimately, we identified 8 studies comprising a total of 346 patients with dementia (152 patients with DLB and 194 patients with other dementias). The pooled sensitivity of MIBG scintigraphy in detection of DLB was 98% (95% CI, 94-100%); the pooled specificity of MIBG scintigraphy in differential diagnosis between DLB and other dementias was 94% (95% CI, 90-97%). The area under the ROC curve was .99. CONCLUSIONS Myocardial innervation imaging with MIBG scintigraphy demonstrated high pooled sensitivity and specificity in patients with suspected DLB. MIBG scintigraphy is an accurate test for differential diagnosis between DLB and other dementias.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available