Comparative accuracy and cost-effectiveness of dynamic contrast-enhanced CT and positron emission tomography in the characterisation of solitary pulmonary nodules.

INTRODUCTION: Dynamic contrast-enhanced CT (DCE-CT) and positron emission tomography/CT (PET/CT) have a high reported accuracy for the diagnosis of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules (SPNs). The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of these. METHODS: In this prospective multicentre trial, 380 participants with an SPN (8-30 mm) and no recent history of malignancy underwent DCE-CT and PET/CT. All patients underwent either biopsy with histological diagnosis or completed CT follow-up. Primary outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity and overall diagnostic accuracy for PET/CT and DCE-CT. Costs and cost-effectiveness were estimated from a healthcare provider perspective using a decision-model. RESULTS: 312 participants (47% female, 68.1±9.0 years) completed the study, with 61% rate of malignancy at 2 years. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive values for DCE-CT were 95.3% (95% CI 91.3 to 97.5), 29.8% (95% CI 22.3 to 38.4), 68.2% (95% CI 62.4% to 73.5%) and 80.0% (95% CI 66.2 to 89.1), respectively, and for PET/CT were 79.1% (95% CI 72.7 to 84.2), 81.8% (95% CI 74.0 to 87.7), 87.3% (95% CI 81.5 to 91.5) and 71.2% (95% CI 63.2 to 78.1). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) for DCE-CT and PET/CT was 0.62 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.67) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.76 to 0.85), respectively (p<0.001). Combined results significantly increased diagnostic accuracy over PET/CT alone (AUROC=0.90 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.93), p<0.001). DCE-CT was preferred when the willingness to pay per incremental cost per correctly treated malignancy was below £9000. Above £15 500 a combined approach was preferred. CONCLUSIONS: PET/CT has a superior diagnostic accuracy to DCE-CT for the diagnosis of SPNs. Combining both techniques improves the diagnostic accuracy over either test alone and could be cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02013063.

High-frequency jet ventilation under general anesthesia facilitates CT-guided lung tumor thermal ablation compared with normal respiration under conscious analgesic sedation.

PURPOSE: To determine whether technical difficulty of computed tomography (CT)-guided percutaneous lung tumor thermal ablations is altered with the use of high-frequency jet ventilation (HFJV) under general anesthesia (GA) compared with procedures performed with normal respiration (NR) under conscious sedation (CS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thermal ablation treatment sessions performed with NR under CS or HFJV under GA with available anesthesia records and CT fluoroscopic images were retrospectively reviewed; 13 and 33 treatment sessions, respectively, were identified. One anesthesiologist determined the choice of anesthesiologic technique independently. Surrogate measures of procedure technical difficulty--time duration, number of CT fluoroscopic acquisitions, and radiation dose required for applicator placement for each tumor--were compared between anesthesiologic techniques. The anesthesiologist time and complications were also compared. Parametric and nonparametric data were compared by Student independent-samples t test and χ(2) test, respectively. RESULTS: Patients treated with HFJV under GA had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classifications (mean, 2.66 vs 2.23; P = .009) and smaller lung tumors (16.09 mm vs 27.38 mm; P = .001). The time duration (220.30 s vs 393.94 s; P = .008), number of CT fluoroscopic acquisitions (10.31 vs 19.13; P = .023), and radiation dose (60.22 mGy·cm vs 127.68 mGy·cm; P = .012) required for applicator placement were significantly lower in treatment sessions performed with HFJV under GA. There was no significant differences in anesthesiologist time (P = .20), rate of pneumothorax (P = .62), or number of pneumothoraces requiring active treatment (P = .19). CONCLUSIONS: HFJV under GA appears to reduce technical difficulty of CT-guided percutaneous applicator placement for lung tumor thermal ablations, with similar complication rates compared with treatment sessions performed with NR under CS. The technique is safe and may facilitate treatment of technically challenging tumors.

Is microwave ablation more effective than radiofrequency ablation in achieving local control for primary pulmonary malignancy?

A best evidence topic in thoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was 'Is microwave ablation (MWA) more effective than radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in achieving local control for primary lung cancer?'. Altogether, 439 papers were found, of which 7 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Both are thermal ablative techniques, with microwave ablation (MWA) the newer technique and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with a longer track record. Lack of consensus with regard to definitions of technical success and efficacy and heterogeneity of study inclusions limits studies for both. The only direct comparison study does not demonstrate a difference with either technique in achieving local control. The quality of evidence for MWA is very limited by retrospective nature and heterogeneity in technique, power settings and tumour type. Tumour size and late-stage cancer were shown to be associated with higher rates of local recurrence in 1 MWA study. RFA studies were generally of a higher level of evidence comprising prospective trials, systematic review and meta-analysis. The recurrence rates for MWA and RFA overlapped, and for the included studies ranged between 16% and 44% for MWA and 9% and 58% for RFA. The current evidence, therefore, does not clearly demonstrate a benefit of MWA over RFA in achieving local control in primary lung cancer.

Perfusion scintigraphy: diagnostic utility in pregnant women with suspected pulmonary embolic disease.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a major preventable cause of maternal mortality during pregnancy and accurate diagnosis is essential. Computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is a robust diagnostic test in non-pregnant patients with suspected PE. The potential latent carcinogenic effects of CTPA-related breast irradiation mandates careful use of this technique in young women. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of perfusion scintigraphy as the first line investigation in pregnant women with suspected PE. All pregnant women referred for radiological investigation of suspected PE in a 5-year period from January 2001 to December 2005 were included. Demographic data and imaging studies were reviewed. Subsequent pregnancy outcome was determined by case note review. One hundred and five consecutive patients had either perfusion scintigraphy (Q scan) (n = 94), CTPA (n = 9) or both (n = 2), one patient presented twice. Q scans were the first line investigation in 96 (91%) patients. Eighty-nine (92%) scans were normal, seven (7%) were non-diagnostic and one (1%) was high probability. One patient had a thromboembolic event 3 weeks post partum. No adverse events were reported during the follow-up period. Pulmonary embolic disease is uncommon in pregnancy. Perfusion scintigraphy in pregnant patients has an excellent diagnostic yield. The percentage of non-diagnostic scans is much lower than in other patient groups. Scintigraphy imparts a significantly lower breast dose than CTPA and should be used as the first-line investigation in most pregnant patients with suspected PE.