Literature DB >> 34236508

Overuse of follow-up chest computed tomography in patients with incidentally identified nodules suspicious for lung cancer.

Ran Guo1,2,3, Yang Zhang1,2,3, Zelin Ma1,2,3, Chaoqiang Deng1,2,3, Fangqiu Fu1,2,3, Hong Hu1,2,3, Yihua Sun1,2,3, Haiquan Chen4,5,6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Although professional societies agreed that CT screening inconsistent with recommendation leads to radiation-related cancer and unexpected cost, many patients still undergo unnecessary Chest CT before treatment. The goal of this study was to assess the overuse of Chest CT in different type of patients.
METHODS: Data on 1853 patients who underwent pulmonary resection from May 2019 to May 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Data collected include age, sex, follow-up period, density and size of nodules and frequency of undergoing Chest CT. Pearson χ2 test and logistic regression were conducted to compare the receipt of CT screening.
RESULTS: Among 1853 patients in the study, 689 (37.2%) overused Chest CT during follow-up of the pulmonary nodules. This rate was 16.2% among patients with solid nodules, 57.5% among patients with pure ground glass opacity (pGGO), and 41.4% among patients with mixed ground glass opacity (mGGO) (P < 0.001). 50.7% in the "age ≤ 40" group, 39.8% in the "41 ≤ age ≤ 50" group, 38.7% in the "51 ≤ age ≤ 60" group, 32.3% in the "61 ≤ age ≤ 70" group, 27.8% in the " > 70" group underwent unnecessary CT (P < 0.001). Female got more unnecessary CT than male (40.6% vs 32.8%, P < 0.001). Factors associated with a greater likelihood of overusing Chest CT was the density of nodules [odds ratios (ORs) of 0.53 for mGGO; 0.15 for solid nodule, P < 0.0001, vs patients with pGGO].
CONCLUSION: Roughly 37% patients with pulmonary nodules received Chest CT too frequently despite national recommendations against the practice. Closer adherence to clinical guidelines is likely to result in more cost-effective care.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chest CT; Lung cancer screening; Non-small cell lung cancer; Safety

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34236508     DOI: 10.1007/s00432-021-03692-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0171-5216            Impact factor:   4.322


  20 in total

1.  ACR CT accreditation program and the lung cancer screening program designation.

Authors:  Ella A Kazerooni; Mark R Armstrong; Judith K Amorosa; Dina Hernandez; Lawrence A Liebscher; Hrudaya Nath; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Eric J Stern; Pamela A Wilcox
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 5.532

Review 2.  Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Peter B Bach; Joshua N Mirkin; Thomas K Oliver; Christopher G Azzoli; Donald A Berry; Otis W Brawley; Tim Byers; Graham A Colditz; Michael K Gould; James R Jett; Anita L Sabichi; Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Douglas E Wood; Amir Qaseem; Frank C Detterbeck
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Overuse of Chest CT in Patients With Stage I and II Breast Cancer: An Opportunity to Increase Guidelines Compliance at an NCCN Member Institution.

Authors:  Barbara Dull; Andrew Linkugel; Julie A Margenthaler; Amy E Cyr
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 11.908

4.  Brain Imaging for Staging of Patients With Clinical Stage IA Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in the National Lung Screening Trial: Adherence With Recommendations From the Choosing Wisely Campaign.

Authors:  Alex A Balekian; Joshua M Fisher; Michael K Gould
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 9.410

5.  Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening.

Authors:  Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Jonathan D Clapp; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine Gatsonis; Pamela M Marcus; JoRean D Sicks
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Volume CT Screening in a Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Harry J de Koning; Carlijn M van der Aalst; Pim A de Jong; Ernst T Scholten; Kristiaan Nackaerts; Marjolein A Heuvelmans; Jan-Willem J Lammers; Carla Weenink; Uraujh Yousaf-Khan; Nanda Horeweg; Susan van 't Westeinde; Mathias Prokop; Willem P Mali; Firdaus A A Mohamed Hoesein; Peter M A van Ooijen; Joachim G J V Aerts; Michael A den Bakker; Erik Thunnissen; Johny Verschakelen; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Joan E Walter; Kevin Ten Haaf; Harry J M Groen; Matthijs Oudkerk
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Cost-effectiveness of CT screening in the National Lung Screening Trial.

Authors:  William C Black; Ilana F Gareen; Samir S Soneji; JoRean D Sicks; Emmett B Keeler; Denise R Aberle; Arash Naeim; Timothy R Church; Gerard A Silvestri; Jeremy Gorelick; Constantine Gatsonis
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-11-06       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Association of the Intensity of Diagnostic Evaluation With Outcomes in Incidentally Detected Lung Nodules.

Authors:  Farhood Farjah; Sarah E Monsell; Michael K Gould; Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Matthew P Banegas; Patrick J Heagerty; Erin M Keast; Arvind Ramaprasan; Kurt Schoen; Elena G Brewer; Robert T Greenlee; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 9.  Radiation exposure from chest CT: issues and strategies.

Authors:  Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael M Maher; Stefania Rizzo; David Kanarek; Jo-Anne O Shepard; Jo-Anne O Shephard
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.153

10.  The Prognostic Significance of Pure Ground Glass Opacities in Lung Cancer Computed Tomographic Images.

Authors:  Cuicui Huang; Chao Wang; Yadong Wang; Jichang Liu; Fenglong Bie; Yu Wang; Jiajun Du
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2019-11-17       Impact factor: 4.207

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.