Scholarlink

<p>The term ‘brain perfusion’ is applied in clinical practice to a family of neuroimaging techniques that measure, in reality, quite different physiological quantities in the brain circulation. CT perfusion (CTP) and DSC-MRI track a contrast bolus to derive semi-quantitative haemodynamic parameters. ASL-MRI estimates cerebral blood flow (CBF) without contrast, but the result is sensitive to arterial transit time, haematocrit, and the patient’s haemodynamic state on the day of the scan. DCE-MRI quantifies blood–brain barrier (BBB) permeability, a property of the neurovascular unit rather than a flow measurement. Perfusion SPECT provides a relative, normalisation-dependent CBF map that is distorted by cortical atrophy. [¹⁸F]FDG-PET reflects synaptic glucose metabolism, but not blood flow. Because these techniques answer different physiological questions, their results are not interchangeable, and applying a threshold or pattern derived from one modality to interpret another is methodologically unsound — yet this conflation occurs with regularity in clinical practice. This narrative review synthesises the clinical applications, diagnostic performance, and interpretive pitfalls of each technique in Alzheimer’s disease (AD)/mild cognitive impairment (MCI-AD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB)/Parkinson’s disease dementia (PDD), frontotemporal dementia (FTD)/primary progressive aphasia (PPA), and mixed dementia with vascular pathology. Recognised limitations include the narrative study design and the small number of head-to-head multi-modal studies in pathologically confirmed cohorts. A comparative table and practical minimum reporting elements are provided.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Perfusion as a biomarker of brain dysfunction in dementia (AD, DLB, FTD/PPA, PDD): comparison of CT, MRI (ASL/DSC/DCE), SPECT, and PET with interpretive pitfalls — a narrative review

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月29日

查看全文
  • Katarzyna Sklinda,
  • Jan Bocianski,
  • Tadeusz Budlewski,
  • Malgorzata Kobylecka,
  • Malgorzata Dorobek,
  • Andrzej Gorecki,
  • Bartosz Mruk,
  • Michal Błaszczak,
  • Jerzy Walecki

摘要

The term ‘brain perfusion’ is applied in clinical practice to a family of neuroimaging techniques that measure, in reality, quite different physiological quantities in the brain circulation. CT perfusion (CTP) and DSC-MRI track a contrast bolus to derive semi-quantitative haemodynamic parameters. ASL-MRI estimates cerebral blood flow (CBF) without contrast, but the result is sensitive to arterial transit time, haematocrit, and the patient’s haemodynamic state on the day of the scan. DCE-MRI quantifies blood–brain barrier (BBB) permeability, a property of the neurovascular unit rather than a flow measurement. Perfusion SPECT provides a relative, normalisation-dependent CBF map that is distorted by cortical atrophy. [¹⁸F]FDG-PET reflects synaptic glucose metabolism, but not blood flow. Because these techniques answer different physiological questions, their results are not interchangeable, and applying a threshold or pattern derived from one modality to interpret another is methodologically unsound — yet this conflation occurs with regularity in clinical practice. This narrative review synthesises the clinical applications, diagnostic performance, and interpretive pitfalls of each technique in Alzheimer’s disease (AD)/mild cognitive impairment (MCI-AD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB)/Parkinson’s disease dementia (PDD), frontotemporal dementia (FTD)/primary progressive aphasia (PPA), and mixed dementia with vascular pathology. Recognised limitations include the narrative study design and the small number of head-to-head multi-modal studies in pathologically confirmed cohorts. A comparative table and practical minimum reporting elements are provided.