Diagnostic value of 18F-FDG-PET/CT for the evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Nuclear Medicine Communications

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 67-75

  Ruilong, Zong ^a   Daohai, Xie ^a   Li, Geng ^a   Xiaohong, Wang ^a   Chunjie, Wang ^a   Lei, Tian ^a  

^a THE FIRST AFFILIATED HOSPITAL OF SOOCHOW UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Meta analysis; PET; Solitary pulmonary nodules

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; FLUORINE; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ARTICLE; COCHRANE LIBRARY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; HUMAN; LUNG NODULE; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; PNEUMOTHORAX; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY-COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; LUNG TUMOR; PROCEDURES; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

FLUORINE RADIOISOTOPES; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOLITARY PULMONARY NODULE;

EID: 85004075721     PISSN: 01433636     EISSN: 14735628     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000000605     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Hansell DM, Bankier AA, MacMahon H, MacMahon H, McLoud TC, Muller NL, Remy J. Fleischner society: glossary of terms for thoracic imaging 1. Radiology 2008; 246:697-722.
2. Sim YT, Poon FW. Imaging of solitary pulmonary nodule-A clinical review. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2013; 3:316.
3. Vicente AMG, Martínez AFH, Londoño GAJ, Caicedo CHV, Atance PL, Castrejón AMS. 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the assessment of pulmonary solitary nodules: comparison of different analysis methods and risk variables in the prediction of malignancy. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2015; 4:228.
4. Dabrowska M, Krenke R, Korczynski P, Maskey-Warzechowska M, Zukowska M, Kunikowska J, Chazan R. Diagnostic accuracy of contrastenhanced computed tomography and positron emission tomography with 18-FDG in identifying malignant solitary pulmonary nodules. Medicine (Baltimore) 2015; 94:e666.
5. Chang CY, Tzao C, Lee SC, Cheng CY, Liu CH, Huang WS, Wong CYO. Incremental value of integrated FDG-PET/CT in evaluating indeterminate solitary pulmonary nodule for malignancy. Mol Imaging Biol 2010; 12:204-209.
6. Gurney JW. Determining the likelihood of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules with Bayesian analysis. Part I. Theory. Radiology 1993; 186:405-413.
7. Lillington GA, Caskey CI. Evaluation and management of solitary and multiple pulmonary nodules. Clin Chest Med 1993; 14:111-119.
8. Sim YT, Goh YG, Dempsey MF, Han S, Poon FW. PET-CT evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules: correlation with maximum standardized uptake value and pathology. Lung 2013; 191:625-632.
9. Orlacchio A, Schillaci O, Antonelli L, D'Urso S, Sergiacomi G, Nicoli P, Simonetti G. Solitary pulmonary nodules: morphological and metabolic characterisation by FDG-PET-MDCT. Radiol Med (Torino) 2007; 112:157-173.
10. Bogot NR, Shaham D. Semi-invasive and invasive procedures for the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer II: bronchoscopic and surgical procedures. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38:535-544.
11. Gupta NC, Maloof J, Gunel E. Probability of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules using fluorine-18-FDG and PET. J Nucl Med 1996; 37:943-948.
12. Jeong SY, Lee KS, Shin KM, Bae YA, Kim BT, Choe BK, Chung MJ. Efficacy of PET/CT in the characterization of solid or partly solid solitary pulmonary nodules. Lung Cancer 2008; 61:186-194.
13. Yi CA, Lee KS, Kim B-T, Choi JY, Kwon OJ, Kim H, et al. Tissue characterization of solitary pulmonary nodule: comparative study between helical dynamic CT and integrated PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2006; 47:443-450.
14. Dalli A, Selimoglu Sen H, Coskunsel M, Komek H, Abakay O, Sergi C. Diagnostic value of PET/CT in differentiating benign from malignant solitary pulmonary nodules. J BUON 2013; 18:935-941.
15. López OG, Vicente AMG, Martínez AFH, Londoño GAJ, Londoño GAJ, Caicedo CHV, et al. 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the assessment of pulmonary solitary nodules: comparison of different analysis methods and risk variables in the prediction of malignancy. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2015; 4:228.
16. Kang SK, Zhang A, Pandharipande PV, Chandarana H, Braithwaite RS, Littenberg B. DWI for renal mass characterization: systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance. Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205:317-324.
17. Li Y, Chen Z, Wang J. Differential diagnosis between malignant and benign hepatic tumors using apparent diffusion coefficient on 1.5-T MR imaging: A meta analysis. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81:484-490.
18. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Br Med J 2003; 327:557.
19. Sheikhbahaei S, Taghipour M, Ahmad R, Fakhry C, Kiess AP, Chung CH, Subramaniam RM. Diagnostic accuracy of follow-up FDG PET or PET/CT in patients with head and neck cancer after definitive treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205:629-639.
20. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002; 21:1539-1558.
21. Dinnes J, Deeks J, Kirby J, Roderick P. A methodological review of how heterogeneity has been examined in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Health Technol Assess 2005; 9:1-113.
22. Deeks JJ, Macaskill P, Irwig L. The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol 2005; 58:882-893.
23. Imai Y, Murakami T, Yoshida S, Nishikawa M, Ohsawa M, Tokunaga K, Nakamura H. Superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance images of hepatocellular carcinoma: correlation with histological grading. Hepatology 2000; 32:205-212.
24. Zhang J, Cui LB, Tang X, Ren XL, Shi JR, Yang HN, Yin H. DW MRI at 3.0 T versus FDG PET/CT for detection of malignant pulmonary tumors. Int J Cancer 2014; 134:606-611.
25. Li S, Zhao B, Wang X, Yu J, Yan S, Lv C, Yang Y. Overestimated value of 18F-FDG PET/CT to diagnose pulmonary nodules: analysis of 298 patients. Clin Radiol 2014; 69:e352-e357.
26. Degirmenci B, Wilson D, Laymon CM, Becker C, Mason NS, Bencherif B, Avril N. Standardized uptake value-based evaluations of solitary pulmonary nodules using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/computed tomography. Nucl Med Commun 2008; 29:614-622.
27. Herder GJ, Golding RP, Hoekstra OS, Comans EF, Teule GJ, Postmus PE, Smit EF. The performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in small solitary pulmonary nodules. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31:1231-1236.
28. Li YL, Su M, Li F, Kuang A, Tian R. The value of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the differential diagnosis of solitary pulmonary nodules in areas with a high incidence of tuberculosis. Ann Nucl Med 2011; 25:804-811.
29. Martins RC, Almeida SA, Siciliano AAO, Landesmann MCPP, Silva FBD, Franco CADB, et al. Value of [18F]-FDG-PET/CT as a predictor of cancer in solitary pulmonary nodule. J Bras Pneumol 2008; 34:473-480.
30. Li XF, Huang T, Jiang H, Wang X, Shen B, Wang X, Civelek AC. Combined injection of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and 3'-deoxy-3'-[18F] fluorothymidine PET achieves more complete identification of viable lung cancer cells in mice and patients than individual radiopharmaceutical: A proof-of-concept study. Transl Oncol 2013; 6:775-IN37.
31. Li XF, Dai D, Song XY, Liu JJ, Zhu YJ, Xu WG. Comparison of the diagnostic performance of 18F-fluorothymidine versus 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography on pulmonary lesions: A meta analysis. Mol Clin Oncol 2015; 3:101-108.
32. Wiener RS, Wiener DC, Gould MK. Risks of transthoracic needle biopsy: how high? Clin Pulmonary Med 2013; 20:29.
33. Deppen SA, Blume JD, Kensinger CD, Morgan AM, Aldrich MC, Massion PP, Grogan EL. Accuracy of FDG-PET to diagnose lung cancer in areas with infectious lung disease: A meta-analysis. JAMA 2014; 312: 1227-1236.
34. Lee TS, Ahn SH, Moon BS, Chun KS, Kang JH, Cheon GJ, Lim SM. Comparison of 18F-FDG, 18F-FET and 18F-FLT for differentiation between tumor and inflammation in rats. Nucl Med Biol 2009; 36:681-686.
35. Cronin P, Dwamena BA, Kelly AM, Carlos RC. Solitary pulmonary nodules: meta-analytic comparison of cross-sectional imaging modalities for diagnosis of malignancy. Radiology 2008; 246:772-782.
36. Rosenbaum SJ, Lind T, Antoch G, Bockisch A. False-positive FDG PET uptake - the role of PET/CT. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:1054-1065.
37. Boellaard R. Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis. J Nucl Med 2009; 50 (Suppl 1):11S-20S.
38. Hoffman EJ, Huang SC, Phelps ME. Quantitation in positron emission computed tomography: 1. Effect of object size. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1979; 3:299-308.
39. Hickeson M, Yun M, Matthies A, Zhuang H, Adam LE, Lacorte L, Alavi A. Use of a corrected standardized uptake value based on the lesion size on CT permits accurate characterization of lung nodules on FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002; 29:1639-1647.
40. Duhaylongsod FG, Lowe VJ, Patz EF, Vaughn AL, Coleman RE, Wolfe WG. Lung tumor growth correlates with glucose metabolism measured by fluoride-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Ann Thorac Surg 1995; 60:1348-1352.
41. Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Mirtcheva R, McGuinness G, McCauley D, MiettinenO S. CT screening for lung cancer: frequency and significance of part-solid and nonsolid nodules. Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178:1053-1057.
42. Herder GJ, van Tinteren H, Golding RP, Kostense PJ, Comans EF, Smit EF, et al. Clinical prediction model to characterize pulmonary nodules: validation and added value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Chest 2005; 128:2490-2496.
43. Callister MEJ, Baldwin DR. How should pulmonary nodules be optimally investigated and managed? Lung Cancer 2016; 91:48-55.
44. Graham RNJ, Baldwin DR, Callister MEJ, Gleeson FV. Return of the pulmonary nodule: The radiologist's key role in implementing the 2015 BTS guidelines on the investigation and management of pulmonary nodules. Br J Radiol 2016; 89:20150776.