Cited by 85Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications

Temporoparietal hypometabolism in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and associated imaging diagnostic errors

Open access
Womack, Kyle B., Diaz-Arrastia, Ramon, Aizenstein, Howard J., Arnold, Steven E., Barbas, Nancy R., Boeve, Bradley F., Clark, Christopher M., DeCarli, Charles S. +15 more·2011·Archives of Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cause of diagnostic errors in the visual interpretation of positron emission tomographic scans with fludeoxyglucose F 18 (FDG-PET) in patients with frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and patients with Alzheimer disease (AD). DESIGN: Twelve trained raters unaware of clinical and autopsy information independently reviewed FDG-PET scans and provided their diagnostic impression and confidence of either FTLD or AD. Six of these raters also recorded whether metabolism appeared normal or abnormal in 5 predefined brain regions in each hemisphere-frontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, anterior temporal cortex, temporoparietal cortex, and posterior cingulate cortex. Results were compared with neuropathological diagnoses. SETTING: Academic medical centers. PATIENTS: Forty-five patients with pathologically confirmed FTLD (n=14) or AD (n=31). RESULTS: Raters had a high degree of diagnostic accuracy in the interpretation of FDG-PET scans; however, raters consistently found some scans more difficult to interpret than others. Unanimity of diagnosis among the raters was more frequent in patients with AD (27 of 31 patients [87%]) than in patients with FTLD (7 of 14 patients [50%]) (P=.02). Disagreements in interpretation of scans in patients with FTLD largely occurred when there was temporoparietal hypometabolism, which was present in 7 of the 14 FTLD scans and 6 of the 7 scans lacking unanimity. Hypometabolism of anterior cingulate and anterior temporal regions had higher specificities and positive likelihood ratios for FTLD than temporoparietal hypometabolism had for AD. CONCLUSIONS: Temporoparietal hypometabolism in FTLD is common and may cause inaccurate interpretation of FDG-PET scans. An interpretation paradigm that focuses on the absence of hypometabolism in regions typically affected in AD before considering FTLD is likely to misclassify a significant portion of FTLD scans. Anterior cingulate and/or anterior temporal hypometabolism indicates a high likelihood of FTLD, even when temporoparietal hypometabolism is present. Ultimately, the accurate interpretation of FDG-PET scans in patients with dementia cannot rest on the presence or absence of a single region of hypometabolism but rather must take into account the relative hypometabolism of all brain regions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archneurol.2010.295

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Womack, K. B., Diaz-Arrastia, R., Aizenstein, H. J., Arnold, S. E., Barbas, N. R., Boeve, B. F., Clark, C. M., DeCarli, C. S., Jagust, W. J., Leverenz, J. B., Peskind, E. R., Turner, R. S., Zamrini, E. Y., Heidebrink, J. L., Burke, J. R., DeKosky, S. T., Farlow, M. R., Gabel, M. J., Higdon, R., Kawas, C. H., Koeppe, R. A., Lipton, A. M., & Foster, N. L.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • Seattle Children's Hospital (US)
Venue
Archives of Neurology
Published
2011-03-01
Volume
68
Issue
3
Pages
329-37
ISSN
0003-9942 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2119315037
Cited by
85
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 9
FWCI
5.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (AG 10133, P30AG010129, P30AG010133, AG 05-133, AG 08671, AG22394, P30AG012300, P50AG005133, AG 16573, P30AG028377, U01AG016976, P30AG010124, P50AG016573, AG-10124, AG028377, AG-10129, K23AG030006, AG-16976, AG30006, R01AG022394, P50AG008671, AG 12300)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Keywords
frontotemporal lobar degeneration, Alzheimer's disease, FDG-PET, diagnostic errors, interobserver agreement, anterior cingulate cortex, anterior temporal cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, differential diagnosis of dementia, brain metabolism
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Brain, Diagnosis, Differential, Diagnostic Errors, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Parietal Lobe, Temporal Lobe, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation, Age of Onset, Radiopharmaceuticals, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18, Positron-Emission Tomography, Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review