4.5 Article

18F-FDG PET-CT pattern in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus

期刊

NEUROIMAGE-CLINICAL
卷 18, 期 -, 页码 897-902

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2018.02.031

关键词

FDG-PET; Normal pressure hydrocephalus; Hypometabolism; Caudate; Biomarker

资金

  1. Mayo Alzheimer Disease Research grant [P50 AG016574]
  2. Mayo Clinic Study on Aging [U01 AG006786]
  3. Abigail van Buren Alzheimer Disease Research Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is an important and treatable cause of neurologic impairment. Diagnosis is complicated due to symptoms overlapping with other age related disorders. The pathophysiology underlying iNPH is not well understood. We explored FDG-PET abnormalities in iNPH patients in order to determine if FDG-PET may serve as a biomarker to differentiate iNPH from common neurodegenerative disorders. Methods: We retrospectively compared 18F-FDG PET-CT imaging patterns from seven iNPH patients (mean age 74 +/- 6 years) to age and sex matched controls, as well as patients diagnosed with clinical Alzheimer's disease dementia (AD), Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB) and Parkinson's Disease Dementia (PDD), and behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). Partial volume corrected and uncorrected images were reviewed separately. Results: Patients with iNPH, when compared to controls, AD, DLB/PDD, and bvFTD, had significant regional hypometabolism in the dorsal striatum, involving the caudate and putamen bilaterally. These results remained highly significant after partial volume correction. Conclusions: In this study, we report a FDG-PET pattern of hypometabolism in iNPH involving the caudate and putamen with preserved cortical metabolism. This pattern may differentiate iNPH from degenerative diseases and has the potential to serve as a biomarker for iNPH in future studies. These findings also further our understanding of the pathophysiology underlying the iNPH clinical presentation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据