Review Article
Perfusion Imaging with SPECT in the Era of Pathophysiology-Based Biomarkers for Alzheimer's Disease
Table 1
Perfusion SPECT versus biomarkers in AD.
| Method | FDG-PET | Perfusion-SPECT | CSF | Amyloid-PET |
| First description | Farkas et al., 1982 [9] | Launes et al., 1991 [2] | Motter et al., 1995 [32] | Klunk et al., 2004 [22] | Diagnostic accuracy Sensitivity Specificity Meta-analysis | [10] 86% (CI: 76%–93%) 86% (CI: 72%–93%) Yes | [3] 66% (CI: 62%–69%) 79% (CI: 75%–83%) Yes | [13, 15] 80%–85% 85%–90% Yes | [23] appr. 85%–100%% appr. 85%–100% No | Clinical availability | Academic centers | Greater hospitals | Theoretically everywhere | Academic centers | Equipment | Cycloton | Gamma-camera | ELISA reader | Cycloton | Cost Estimation | 1000 EUR | 300 EUR | 200 EUR | 2000 EUR | Expertise for result interpretation | High | High | High | High | Treatment options if test positive | MCI: negative | MCI: negative | MCI: negative | MCI: negative | AD: positive | AD: positive | AD: positive | AD: positive | | | DLB: off-label FTD: negative | | |
|
|
CI: 95% confidence interval. MCI: mild cognitive impairment.
|