Abstract
Introduction: The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact PET with (18)F-FDG and (11)C-PIB in patients with dementia in a developing country. Methodology: Retrospective study of the patients referred for the evaluation of dementia to the only PET center in Uruguay. A total of 248 patients were identified, from which 70 patients were included based on the availability of medical history and clinical follow-up. Main outcomes included change in diagnosis, diagnostic dilemma and AD treatment. We evaluated the association of clinical outcomes with PET concordance with baseline diagnosis, diagnostic dilemma, level of education, AD pathology/Non-AD pathology (AD/Non-AD), baseline diagnosis and (11)C-PIB PET result. Results: Baseline clinical diagnosis was concordant with (18)F-FDG and (11)C-PIB PET results in 64.7 and 77.1% of the patients, respectively. Change in diagnosis after PET was identified in 30.0% of the patients and was associated with discordant (18)F-FDG (p = 0.002) and (11)C-PIB (p < 0.001) PET results, previous diagnostic dilemma (p = 0.005), low education (p = 0.027), Non-AD baseline diagnosis (p = 0.027), and negative (11)C-PIB PET result (p < 0.001). Only the last variable remained significant in the multivariate analysis (adjusted p = 0.038). Diagnostic dilemma decreased after PET from 15.7 to 7.1% (p = 0.11) and was associated with Non-AD diagnosis (p = 0.002) and negative (11)C-PIB PET result (p = 0.003). Change in AD treatment after PET occurred in 45.7% of the patients. Conclusion: (18)F-FDG and (11)C-PIB PET had a significant clinical impact in terms of change in diagnosis and treatment in patients with dementia in a developing country, similar to that reported in high-income countries.