Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
INTRODUCTION: Diagnostic effectiveness of Ioflupane I 123 injection (DaTSCAN™, DaTscan™, or [123I]FP-CIT or ioflupane [(123)I]) SPECT imaging, was assessed in patients with clinically uncertain parkinsonian syndrome (CUPS). METHODS: We investigated the association between subject's Hoehn & Yahr (H&Y) stage, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), age, and motor symptom subgroups and diagnostic performance of ioflupane [(123)I] imaging. Phase 4 study data were used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and accuracy in 92 CUPS subjects, using 1-year clinical diagnosis after ioflupane [(123)I] imaging as reference standard. RESULTS: Diagnostic effectiveness of ioflupane [(123)I] imaging was high in all subgroups: 91% to 100% for H&Y low (<2) and high (≥2) stage subjects; 93% to 96% for MMSE low (<29) or high (≥29) scores; 91% to100% in both age subgroups (younger [<68] and older [≥68]); and 92% to 100% in subjects with both tremor dominant and balanced motor signs. Specificity of ioflupane [(123)I] imaging for bradykinetic rigid or posturally (BRP) unstable motor subtype was lower, but better than for baseline clinical diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Strongest diagnostic performance of ioflupane [(123)I] imaging for clinical diagnosis of Parkinson's syndrome (PS) or non-PS was associated with tremor and balanced motor dominance rather than with BRP dominance. High diagnostic effectiveness of ioflupane [(123)I] imaging and favourable performance relative to final clinical diagnosis at 1 year post-scan in subjects with CUPS was demonstrated. This study suggests that the diagnostic performance of ioflupane [(123)I] imaging in CUPS remains high at all stages of disease, including early stage, and across both age groups and cognitive state (MMSE).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bajaj et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: