Introduction: The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact PET with 18F-FDG and 11C-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 11C-PIB PET result.Results: Baseline clinical diagnosis was concordant with 18F-FDG and 11C-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 18F-FDG (p = 0.002) and 11C-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 11C-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 11C-PIB PET result (p = 0.003). Change in AD treatment after PET occurred in 45.7% of the patients.Conclusion:18F-FDG and 11C-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.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in early (EOAD) and late (LOAD) onset of Alzheimer´s disease, as well as glucose uptake, regional cerebral blood flow (R1), amyloid depositions, and functional brain connectivity between normal young (YC) and Old Controls (OC). Methodology: The study included 22 YC (37 ± 5 y), 22 OC (73 ± 5.9 y), 18 patients with EOAD (63 ± 9.5 y), and 18 with LOAD (70.6 ± 7.1 y). Patients underwent FDG and PIB PET/CT. R1 images were obtained from the compartmental analysis of the dynamic PIB acquisitions. Images were analyzed by a voxel-wise and a VOI-based approach. Functional connectivity was studied from the R1 and glucose uptake images. Results: OC had a significant reduction of R1 and glucose uptake compared to YC, predominantly at the dorsolateral and mesial frontal cortex. EOAD and LOAD vs. OC showed a decreased R1 and glucose uptake at the posterior parietal cortex, precuneus, and posterior cingulum. EOAD vs. LOAD showed a reduction in glucose uptake and R1 at the occipital and parietal cortex and an increased at the mesial frontal and temporal cortex. There was a mild increase in an amyloid deposition at the frontal cortex in LOAD vs. EOAD. YC presented higher connectivity than OC in R1 but lower connectivity considering glucose uptake. Moreover, EOAD and LOAD showed a decreased connectivity compared to controls that were more pronounced in glucose uptake than R1. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated differences in amyloid deposition and functional imaging between groups and a differential pattern of functional connectivity in R1 and glucose uptake in each clinical condition. These findings provide new insights into the pathophysiological processes of AD and may have an impact on patient diagnostic evaluation.