BACKGROUND: Recommendations for using FDG-PET to support the diagnosis of dementing neurodegenerative disorders are sparse and poorly structured. METHODS: We defined 21 questions on diagnostic issues and on semi-automated analysis to assist visual reading. Literature was reviewed to assess study design, risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness and effect size. Critical outcomes were sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive/negative predictive value, area under the receiving operating characteristic curve, and positive/negative likelihood ratio of FDG-PET in detecting the target conditions. Using the Delphi method, an expert panel voted for/against the use of FDG-PET based on published evidence and expert opinion. RESULTS: Of the 1435 papers, 58 provided proper quantitative assessment of test performance. The panel agreed on recommending FDG-PET for 14 questions: diagnosing mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD), frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) or dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB); diagnosing atypical AD and pseudodementia; differentiating between AD and DLB, FTLD, or vascular dementia, between DLB and FTLD, and between Parkinson's disease (PD) and progressive supranuclear palsy; suggesting underlying pathophysiology in corticobasal degeneration and progressive primary aphasia, and cortical dysfunction in PD; using semi-automated assessment to assist visual reading. Panelists did not support FDG-PET use for preclinical stages of neurodegenerative disorders, for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and Huntington disease (HD) diagnoses, and ALS or HD-related cognitive decline. CONCLUSIONS: Despite limited formal evidence, panelists deemed FDG-PET useful in the early and differential diagnosis of the main neurodegenerative disorders, and semiautomated assessment helpful to assist visual reading. These decisions are proposed as interim recommendations. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.