{"title":"淀粉样蛋白-β 正电子发射断层扫描与磁共振成像在阿尔茨海默病中的诊断性能比较：头对头 Meta 分析。","authors":"Fang Li, Jiang Cheng, Kaihui Jin, Li Zhao, Junyong Li, Jia Wu, Xiaolu Ren","doi":"10.1002/brb3.70111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative diagnostic performance of amyloid-β positron emission tomography (Aβ PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease (AD).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>An extensive search was conducted in the PubMed and Embase databases to identify available publications up to December 2023. Head-to-head comparative studies were included if they evaluated the diagnostic performance of Aβ PET and MRI in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed using the DerSimonian and Laird method, followed by transformation via the Freeman–Tukey double inverse sine transformation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Six articles involving 560 patients were included in the meta-analysis. When distinguishing AD from mild cognitive impairment (MCI), both methods showed comparable sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.71, MRI: 0.62) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.68, MRI: 0.69), with no statistically significant differences observed (<i>p</i> = 0.34 and 0.99). When identifying AD from normal cognitive control (NC), both Aβ PET and MRI showed similar results, with comparable sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.93, MRI: 0.85) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.95, MRI: 0.82), without significant differences (<i>p</i> = 0.38 and 0.19). Similarly, in detecting MCI from NC, both Aβ PET and MRI demonstrated similar sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.69, MRI: 0.64) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.75, MRI: 0.76) without significant differences (<i>p</i> = 0.40 and 0.94). However, 18F-FMM seems to have a higher specificity compared to MRI when distinguishing AD from MCI (<i>P</i> = 0.03) and AD from NC (<i>p</i> = 0.04).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Our meta-analysis indicates that Aβ PET demonstrates similar sensitivity and specificity to MRI in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease. However, the limited number of studies may impact the evidence of the current study; further larger sample prospective research is required to confirm these findings.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11494400/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Diagnostic Performance of Amyloid-β Positron Emission Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Alzheimer's Disease: A Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Fang Li, Jiang Cheng, Kaihui Jin, Li Zhao, Junyong Li, Jia Wu, Xiaolu Ren\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/brb3.70111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative diagnostic performance of amyloid-β positron emission tomography (Aβ PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease (AD).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>An extensive search was conducted in the PubMed and Embase databases to identify available publications up to December 2023. Head-to-head comparative studies were included if they evaluated the diagnostic performance of Aβ PET and MRI in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed using the DerSimonian and Laird method, followed by transformation via the Freeman–Tukey double inverse sine transformation.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Six articles involving 560 patients were included in the meta-analysis. When distinguishing AD from mild cognitive impairment (MCI), both methods showed comparable sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.71, MRI: 0.62) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.68, MRI: 0.69), with no statistically significant differences observed (<i>p</i> = 0.34 and 0.99). When identifying AD from normal cognitive control (NC), both Aβ PET and MRI showed similar results, with comparable sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.93, MRI: 0.85) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.95, MRI: 0.82), without significant differences (<i>p</i> = 0.38 and 0.19). Similarly, in detecting MCI from NC, both Aβ PET and MRI demonstrated similar sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.69, MRI: 0.64) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.75, MRI: 0.76) without significant differences (<i>p</i> = 0.40 and 0.94). However, 18F-FMM seems to have a higher specificity compared to MRI when distinguishing AD from MCI (<i>P</i> = 0.03) and AD from NC (<i>p</i> = 0.04).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our meta-analysis indicates that Aβ PET demonstrates similar sensitivity and specificity to MRI in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease. However, the limited number of studies may impact the evidence of the current study; further larger sample prospective research is required to confirm these findings.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11494400/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/brb3.70111\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/brb3.70111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Diagnostic Performance of Amyloid-β Positron Emission Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Alzheimer's Disease: A Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis
Objective
This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative diagnostic performance of amyloid-β positron emission tomography (Aβ PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease (AD).
Methods
An extensive search was conducted in the PubMed and Embase databases to identify available publications up to December 2023. Head-to-head comparative studies were included if they evaluated the diagnostic performance of Aβ PET and MRI in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed using the DerSimonian and Laird method, followed by transformation via the Freeman–Tukey double inverse sine transformation.
Results
Six articles involving 560 patients were included in the meta-analysis. When distinguishing AD from mild cognitive impairment (MCI), both methods showed comparable sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.71, MRI: 0.62) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.68, MRI: 0.69), with no statistically significant differences observed (p = 0.34 and 0.99). When identifying AD from normal cognitive control (NC), both Aβ PET and MRI showed similar results, with comparable sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.93, MRI: 0.85) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.95, MRI: 0.82), without significant differences (p = 0.38 and 0.19). Similarly, in detecting MCI from NC, both Aβ PET and MRI demonstrated similar sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.69, MRI: 0.64) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.75, MRI: 0.76) without significant differences (p = 0.40 and 0.94). However, 18F-FMM seems to have a higher specificity compared to MRI when distinguishing AD from MCI (P = 0.03) and AD from NC (p = 0.04).
Conclusions
Our meta-analysis indicates that Aβ PET demonstrates similar sensitivity and specificity to MRI in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease. However, the limited number of studies may impact the evidence of the current study; further larger sample prospective research is required to confirm these findings.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
