Diagnostic Performance of ASL-MRI and FDG-PET in Frontotemporal Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: While the diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is based mostly on clinical features, [18F]-FDG PET has been investigated as a potential imaging golden standard in ambiguous cases, with arterial spin labeling (ASL) MRI gaining recent interest.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the diagnostic performance of ASL MRI in FTD patients and compare it to that of [18F]-FDG PET.

DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus and EMBASE was conducted until March 13, 2024.

STUDY SELECTION: Inclusion criteria were: original articles, patients with FTD and/or its variants, use of ASL MR perfusion imaging with or without [18F]-FDG PET, presence of sufficient diagnostic performance data. Exclusion criteria were: meeting abstracts, comments, summaries, protocols, letters and guidelines, longitudinal studies, overlapping cohorts.

DATA ANALYSIS: The quality of eligible studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for [18F]-FDG PET and ASL MRI were calculated, and a summary receiver operating characteristic curve was plotted.

DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven eligible studies were identified, which included a total of 102 FTD patients. Aside from some of the studies showing at worst an unclear risk of bias in patient selection, index test, flow and timing, all studies showed low risk of bias and applicability concerns in all categories. Data from 4 studies was included in our meta-analysis for ASL MRI and 3 studies for [18F]-FDG PET. Pooled sensitivity, specificity and DOR were 0.70 (95% CI: 0.59-0.79), 0.81 (95% CI: 0.71-0.88) and 8.00 (95% CI: 3.74-17.13) for ASL MRI, and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.71-0.96), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.43-0.99) and 47.18 (95% CI: 10.77-206.75) for [18F]-FDG PET.

LIMITATIONS: The number of studies was relatively small, with a small sample size. The studies used different scanning protocols as well as a mix of diagnostic metrics, all of which might have introduced heterogeneity in the data.

CONCLUSIONS: While ASL MRI performed worse than [18F]-FDG PET in the diagnosis of FTD, it exhibited a decent diagnostic performance to justify its further investigation as a quicker and more convenient alternative.

ABBREVIATIONS: 3DPCASL, 3D pseudocontinuous ASL; AD, Alzheimer’s disease; ASL, arterial spin labeling; AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence interval; DOR, diagnostic odds ratio; FN, false negative; FP, false positive; FTD, frontotemporal dementia; LE, limbic encephalitis; NLR, negative likelihood ratio; PASL, pulsed ASL; PLD, post-label delay; PLR, positive likelihood ratio; PRISMA, PSP, progressive supranuclear palsy; Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis; SROC, summary receiver operative characteristic; TN, true negative; TP, true positive; QUADAS-2, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.