The performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in small solitary pulmonary nodules

  • Gerarda J. Herder
  • Richard P. Golding
  • Otto S. Hoekstra
  • Emile F. Comans
  • Gerrit J. Teule
  • Pieter E. Postmus
  • Egbert F. Smit
Original Article


Solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN, intraparenchymal lung mass <3 cm) is often a diagnostic challenge. This study was performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) in radiologically indeterminate SPN ≤10 mm on spiral CT. Between August 1997 and March 2001, we identified all patients with radiologically indeterminate SPNs ≤10 mm who were referred for FDG PET imaging at the VU University Medical Centre. All PET scans were retrospectively reviewed by an experienced nuclear medicine physician. PET was considered positive in cases with at least moderately enhanced focal uptake, and otherwise as negative. Lesions were considered benign on the basis of histology, no growth during 1.5 years or disappearance within at least 6 months. Thirty-five patients with 36 SPNs ≤10 mm in diameter at clinical presentation were identified (one patient had two metachronous lesions). In 13 of 14 malignant nodules and in two of 22 benign nodules, diagnosis was confirmed by histology. Prevalence of malignancy was 39%. PET imaging correctly identified 30 of 36 small lesions. One lesion proved to be false negative on PET (CT: 10 mm), and in five lesions, PET scans proved to be false positive. Specificity was 77% (17/22; 95% CI: 0.55–0.92), sensitivity 93% (13/14; 95% CI: 0.66–1.0), positive predictive value 72% (13/18; 95% CI: 0.46–0.90) and negative predictive value 94% (17/18; 95% CI: 0.73–1.0). This retrospective study suggests that FDG PET imaging could be a useful tool in differentiating benign from malignant SPNs ≤10 mm in diameter at clinical presentation. Such results may help in the design of larger prospective trials with structured clinical work-up.


Solitary pulmonary nodule Non-small cell lung cancer FDG PET 


  1. 1.
    Cummings SR, Lillington GA, Richard RJ. Managing solitary pulmonary nodules. The choice of strategy is a “close call”. Am Rev Respir Dis 1986;134:453–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ost D, Fein A. Evaluation and management of the solitary pulmonary nodule. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;162:782–87PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Swensen SJ, Jett JR, Payne WS et al. An integrated approach to evaluation of the solitary pulmonary nodule. Mayo Clin Proc 1990;65:173–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bernard A. Resection of pulmonary nodules using video-assisted thoracic surgery. The Thorax Group. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;61:202–4CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Keagy BA, Starek PJ, Murray GF et al. Major pulmonary resection for suspected but unconfirmed malignancy. Ann Thorac Surg 1984;38:314–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mack MJ, Hazelrigg SR, Landreneau RJ et al. Thoracoscopy for the diagnosis of the indeterminate solitary pulmonary nodule. Ann Thorac Surg 1993;56:825–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Siegelman SS, Zerhouni EA, Leo FP et al. CT of the solitary pulmonary nodule. Am J Roentgenol 1980;135:1–13Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Suzuki K, Nagai K, Yoshida J et al. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for small indeterminate pulmonary nodules: indications for preoperative marking. Chest 1999;115:563–68PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baaklini WA, Reinoso MA, Gorin AB et al. Diagnostic yield of fiberoptic bronchoscopy in evaluating solitary pulmonary nodules. Chest 2000;117:1049–54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hsu C. Cytologic diagnosis of lung tumors from bronchial brushings of Chinese patients in Hong Kong. Acta Cytol 1983;27:641–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hayata Y, Oo K, Ichiba M et al. Percutaneous pulmonary puncture for cytologic diagnosis—its diagnostic value for small peripheral pulmonary carcinoma. Acta Cytol 1973;17:469–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li H, Boiselle PM, Shepard JO et al. Diagnostic accuracy and safety of CT-guided percutaneous needle aspiration biopsy of the lung: comparison of small and large pulmonary nodules. Am J Roentgenol 1996;167:105–9Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lacasse Y, Wong E, Guyatt GH et al. Transthoracic needle aspiration biopsy for the diagnosis of localised pulmonary lesions: a meta-analysis. Thorax 1999;54:884–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patz EF Jr, Rossi S, Harpole DH Jr et al. Correlation of tumor size and survival in patients with stage IA non-small cell lung cancer. Chest 2000;117:1568–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    van Rens MT, de la Riviere AB, Elbers HR et al. Prognostic assessment of 2,361 patients who underwent pulmonary resection for non-small cell lung cancer, stage I, II, and IIIA. Chest 2000;117:374–79PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF et al. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:1388–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Balk E, Lau J. PET scans and technology assessment: deja vu? JAMA 2001;285:936–37CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gould MK, Maclean CC, Kuschner WG et al. Accuracy of positron emission tomography for diagnosis of pulmonary nodules and mass lesions: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2001;285:914–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lowe VJ, Fletcher JW, Gobar L et al. Prospective investigation of positron emission tomography in lung nodules. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:1075–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bos R, Der Hoeven JJ, van der Wal E et al. Biologic correlates of (18)fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in human breast cancer measured by positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:379–87PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vansteenkiste JF, Stroobants SG, Dupont PJ et al. FDG-PET scan in potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer: do anatometabolic PET-CT fusion images improve the localisation of regional lymph node metastases? The Leuven Lung Cancer Group. Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25:1495–501CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Swensen SJ, Silverstein MD, Ilstrup DM et al. The probability of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules. Application to small radiologically indeterminate nodules. Arch Intern Med 1997;157:849–55CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Herder GJ, Tinteren H, Comans EF et al. Prospective use of serial questionnaires to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in (suspected) lung cancer. Thorax 2003;58:47–51CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wittenberg J, Fineberg HV, Black EB et al. Clinical efficacy of computed body tomography. Am J Roentgenol 1978;131:5–14Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Boellaard R, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS et al. Effects of image acquisition, reconstruction and ROI definition on the accuracy and reproducibility of standard uptake values. J Nucl Med 2002;44:260Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Baldwin DR, Eaton T, Kolbe J et al. Management of solitary pulmonary nodules: how do thoracic computed tomography and guided fine needle biopsy influence clinical decisions? Thorax 2002;57:817–22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Crippa F, Leutner M, Belli F et al. Which kinds of lymph node metastases can FDG PET detect? A clinical study in melanoma. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1491–94PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Miyauchi T, Wahl RL. Regional 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose uptake varies in normal lung. Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:517–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF et al. Early lung cancer action project: a summary of the findings on baseline screening. Oncologist 2001;6:147–52PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sobue T, Moriyama N, Kaneko M et al. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose helical computed tomography: anti-lung cancer association project. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:911–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yankelevitz DF, Reeves AP, Kostis WJ et al. Small pulmonary nodules: volumetrically determined growth rates based on CT evaluation. Radiology 2000;217:251–56PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerarda J. Herder
    • 1
    • 2
  • Richard P. Golding
    • 3
  • Otto S. Hoekstra
    • 2
  • Emile F. Comans
    • 2
  • Gerrit J. Teule
    • 2
  • Pieter E. Postmus
    • 1
  • Egbert F. Smit
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Pulmonary DiseasesVU University Medical CentreAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Nuclear MedicineVU University Medical CentreAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyVU University Medical CentreAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations