Literature DB >> 18235105

Solitary pulmonary nodules: meta-analytic comparison of cross-sectional imaging modalities for diagnosis of malignancy.

Paul Cronin1, Ben A Dwamena, Aine Marie Kelly, Ruth C Carlos.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To perform a meta-analysis to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), and technetium 99m ((99m)Tc) depreotide single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules (SPNs).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data sources were studies published in PubMed between January 1990 and December 2005. The selected investigations were comparative and noncomparative diagnostic cohort studies to examine the operating characteristics of the four imaging modalities for evaluation of SPNs, involving at least 10 enrolled participants with histologic confirmation and having sufficient data to calculate contingency tables. A random coefficient binary regression model with disease probability conditioned on test results was used to summarize test performance and construct summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Sensitivities, specificities, predictive values, diagnostic odds ratios, and areas under the ROC curve were calculated.
RESULTS: Forty-four studies--10 dynamic CT, six dynamic MR, 22 FDG PET, and seven (99m)Tc-depreotide SPECT--met the inclusion criteria. (One study was included in both the FDG PET and SPECT groups.) Sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values, negative predictive values, diagnostic odds ratios, and areas under the ROC curve were, respectively, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88, 0.97), 0.76 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.97), 0.80 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.86), 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.98), 39.91 (95% CI: 1.21, 81.04), and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.97) for dynamic CT; 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.97), 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73, 0.86), 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.89), 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90, 0.96), 60.59 (95% CI: 5.56, 115.62), and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.98) for dynamic MR; 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.98), 0.82 (95% CI: 0.77, 0.88), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.93), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.94), 97.31 (95% CI: 6.26, 188.37), and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.98) for FDG PET; and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.97), 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78, 0.85), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.97), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.98), 84.50 (95% CI: 34.28, 134.73), and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.98) for (99m)Tc-depreotide SPECT.
CONCLUSION: Dynamic CT and MR, FDG PET, and (99m)Tc-depreotide SPECT are noninvasive and accurate in distinguishing malignant from benign SPNs; differences among these tests are nonsignificant. (c) RSNA, 2008.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18235105     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2463062148

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  60 in total

1.  Diagnostic yield of preoperative computed tomography imaging and the importance of a clinical decision for lung cancer surgery.

Authors:  Shuichi Sato; Teruaki Koike; Yasushi Yamato; Katsuo Yoshiya; Nozomu Motono; Mariko Takeshige; Naoya Koizumi; Keiichi Homma; Hiroko Tsukada; Akira Yokoyama
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2010-09-22

2.  (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography characterization of solitary pulmonary nodules: can we do better?

Authors:  Ana María García Vicente; Víctor M Pérez-García; Ángel Soriano Castrejón
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Return of the pulmonary nodule: the radiologist's key role in implementing the 2015 BTS guidelines on the investigation and management of pulmonary nodules.

Authors:  Richard N J Graham; David R Baldwin; Matthew E J Callister; Fergus V Gleeson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  Positron emission tomography for benign and malignant disease.

Authors:  Anthony Visioni; Julian Kim
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.741

5.  Performance of FDG-PET/CT in solitary pulmonary nodule based on pre-test likelihood of malignancy: results from the ITALIAN retrospective multicenter trial.

Authors:  Laura Evangelista; Alberto Cuocolo; Leonardo Pace; Luigi Mansi; Silvana Del Vecchio; Paolo Miletto; Silvia Sanfilippo; Sara Pellegrino; Luca Guerra; Giovanna Pepe; Giuseppina Peluso; Marco Salvatore; Rosj Galicchio; Michele Zuffante; Salvatore Annunziata; Mohsen Farsad; Agostino Chiaravalloti; Marco Spadafora
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Solitary pulmonary nodules and masses: a meta-analysis of the diagnostic utility of alternative imaging tests.

Authors:  Paul Cronin; Ben A Dwamena; Aine Marie Kelly; Steven J Bernstein; Ruth C Carlos
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-07-08       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Characterisation of solitary pulmonary lesions combining visual perfusion and quantitative diffusion MR imaging.

Authors:  Johan Coolen; Johan Vansteenkiste; Frederik De Keyzer; Herbert Decaluwé; Walter De Wever; Christophe Deroose; Christophe Dooms; Eric Verbeken; Paul De Leyn; Vincent Vandecaveye; Dirk Van Raemdonck; Kristiaan Nackaerts; Steven Dymarkowski; Johny Verschakelen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-10-31       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  [Radiological evaluation of incidental pulmonary nodules].

Authors:  H Prosch; C Schaefer-Prokop
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 9.  Clinical applications of textural analysis in non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Iain Phillips; Mazhar Ajaz; Veni Ezhil; Vineet Prakash; Sheaka Alobaidli; Sarah J McQuaid; Christopher South; James Scuffham; Andrew Nisbet; Philip Evans
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-10-27       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 10.  Contrast-enhanced CT- and MRI-based perfusion assessment for pulmonary diseases: basics and clinical applications.

Authors:  Yoshiharu Ohno; Hisanobu Koyama; Ho Yun Lee; Sachiko Miura; Takeshi Yoshikawa; Kazuro Sugimura
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.630

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.