Mostrar el registro sencillo

dc.contributor.authorLage Martínez, Carmen
dc.contributor.authorGonzález Suarez, Andrea
dc.contributor.authorPozueta, Ana
dc.contributor.authorRiancho Zarrabeitia, Javier 
dc.contributor.authorKazimierczak, Martha Eryka
dc.contributor.authorBravo, María
dc.contributor.authorJiménez Bonilla, Julio Francisco 
dc.contributor.authorArcocha Torres, María de
dc.contributor.authorQuirce Pisano, María Remedios 
dc.contributor.authorBanzo, Ignacio
dc.contributor.authorVázquez Higuera, José Luis
dc.contributor.authorRabinovici, Gil D.
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez Rodríguez, Eloy Manuel 
dc.contributor.authorPascual Sánchez, Juan
dc.contributor.otherUniversidad de Cantabriaes_ES
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-21T12:35:45Z
dc.date.available2021-10-21T12:35:45Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.issn1387-2877
dc.identifier.issn1875-8908
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10902/22824
dc.description.abstractThe clinical utility of amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) has not been fully established. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of amyloid imaging on clinical decision making in a secondary care unit and compare our results with a previous study in a tertiary center following the same methods. We reviewed retrospectively 151 cognitively impaired patients who underwent amyloid (Pittsburgh compound B [PiB]) PET and were evaluated clinically before and after the scan in a secondary care unit. One hundred and fifty concurrently underwent fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET. We assessed changes between the pre- and post-PET clinical diagnosis and Alzheimer's disease treatment plan. The association between PiB/FDG results and changes in management was evaluated using ?2 and multivariate logistic regression. Concordance between classification based on scan readings and baseline diagnosis was 66% for PiB and 47% for FDG. The primary diagnosis changed after PET in 17.2% of cases. When examined independently, discordant PiB and discordant FDG were both associated with diagnostic change (p < 0.0001). However, when examined together in a multivariate logistic regression, only discordant PiB remained significant (p = 0.0002). Changes in treatment were associated with concordant PiB (p = 0.009) while FDG had no effect on treatment decisions. Based on our regression model, patients with diagnostic dilemmas, a suspected non-amyloid syndrome, and Clinical Dementia Rating <1 were more likely to benefit from amyloid PET due to a higher likelihood of diagnostic change. We found that changes in diagnosis after PET in our secondary center almost doubled those of our previous analysis of a tertiary unit (9% versus 17.2%). Our results offer some clues about the rational use of amyloid PET in a secondary care memory unit stressing its utility in mild cognitive impairment patients.es_ES
dc.format.extent9 p.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherIOS Presses_ES
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 Internationales_ES
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.sourceJ Alzheimers Dis. 2018;63(3):1025-1033es_ES
dc.subject.otherAlzheimer’s diseasees_ES
dc.subject.otherFDGes_ES
dc.subject.otherPETes_ES
dc.subject.otherPIBes_ES
dc.subject.otherAmyloides_ES
dc.subject.otherDementiaes_ES
dc.titleUtility of Amyloid and FDG-PET in Clinical Practice: Differences Between Secondary and Tertiary Care Memory Unitses_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccesses_ES
dc.identifier.DOI10.3233/JAD-170985
dc.type.versionacceptedVersiones_ES


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo

Attribution 4.0 InternationalExcepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Attribution 4.0 International