Cargando…

The diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported computed tomography imaging in patients presenting with suspected pleural malignancy

OBJECTIVES: Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) provides essential cross-sectional imaging data in patients with suspected pleural malignancy (PM). The performance of CT in routine practice may be lower than in previously reported research. We assessed this relative to ‘real-life’ factors inc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tsim, Selina, Stobo, David B., Alexander, Laura, Kelly, Caroline, Blyth, Kevin G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Scientific Publishers 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5226066/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28024694
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2016.11.010
_version_ 1782493613229342720
author Tsim, Selina
Stobo, David B.
Alexander, Laura
Kelly, Caroline
Blyth, Kevin G.
author_facet Tsim, Selina
Stobo, David B.
Alexander, Laura
Kelly, Caroline
Blyth, Kevin G.
author_sort Tsim, Selina
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) provides essential cross-sectional imaging data in patients with suspected pleural malignancy (PM). The performance of CT in routine practice may be lower than in previously reported research. We assessed this relative to ‘real-life’ factors including use of early arterial-phase contrast enhancement (by CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA)) and non-specialist radiology reporting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Routinely acquired and reported CT scans in patients recruited to the DIAPHRAGM study (a prospective, multi-centre observational study of mesothelioma biomarkers) between January 2014 and April 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. CT reports were classified as malignant if they included specific terms e.g. “suspicious of malignancy”, “stage M1a” and benign if others were used e.g. “indeterminate”, “no cause identified”. All patients followed a standard diagnostic algorithm. The diagnostic performance of CT (overall and based on the above factors) was assessed using 2 × 2 Contingency Tables. RESULTS: 30/345 (9%) eligible patients were excluded (non-contrast (n = 13) or non-contiguous CT (n = 4), incomplete follow-up (n = 13)). 195/315 (62%) patients studied had PM; 90% were cyto-histologically confirmed. 172/315 (55%) presented as an acute admission, of whom 31/172 (18%) had CTPA. Overall, CT sensitivity was 58% (95% CI 51–65%); specificity was 80% (95% CI 72–87%). Sensitivity of CTPA (performed in 31/315 (10%)) was lower (27% (95% CI 9–53%)) than venous-phase CT (61% (95% CI 53–68%) p = 0.0056). Sensitivity of specialist thoracic radiologist reporting was higher (68% (95% CI 55–79%)) than non-specialist reporting (53% (95% CI 44–62%) p = 0.0488). Specificity was not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of CT in routine clinical practice is insufficient to exclude or confirm PM. A benign CT report should not dissuade pleural sampling where the presence of primary or secondary pleural malignancy would alter management. Sensitivity is lower with non-thoracic radiology reporting and particularly low using CTPA.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5226066
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Elsevier Scientific Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52260662017-01-23 The diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported computed tomography imaging in patients presenting with suspected pleural malignancy Tsim, Selina Stobo, David B. Alexander, Laura Kelly, Caroline Blyth, Kevin G. Lung Cancer Article OBJECTIVES: Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) provides essential cross-sectional imaging data in patients with suspected pleural malignancy (PM). The performance of CT in routine practice may be lower than in previously reported research. We assessed this relative to ‘real-life’ factors including use of early arterial-phase contrast enhancement (by CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA)) and non-specialist radiology reporting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Routinely acquired and reported CT scans in patients recruited to the DIAPHRAGM study (a prospective, multi-centre observational study of mesothelioma biomarkers) between January 2014 and April 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. CT reports were classified as malignant if they included specific terms e.g. “suspicious of malignancy”, “stage M1a” and benign if others were used e.g. “indeterminate”, “no cause identified”. All patients followed a standard diagnostic algorithm. The diagnostic performance of CT (overall and based on the above factors) was assessed using 2 × 2 Contingency Tables. RESULTS: 30/345 (9%) eligible patients were excluded (non-contrast (n = 13) or non-contiguous CT (n = 4), incomplete follow-up (n = 13)). 195/315 (62%) patients studied had PM; 90% were cyto-histologically confirmed. 172/315 (55%) presented as an acute admission, of whom 31/172 (18%) had CTPA. Overall, CT sensitivity was 58% (95% CI 51–65%); specificity was 80% (95% CI 72–87%). Sensitivity of CTPA (performed in 31/315 (10%)) was lower (27% (95% CI 9–53%)) than venous-phase CT (61% (95% CI 53–68%) p = 0.0056). Sensitivity of specialist thoracic radiologist reporting was higher (68% (95% CI 55–79%)) than non-specialist reporting (53% (95% CI 44–62%) p = 0.0488). Specificity was not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of CT in routine clinical practice is insufficient to exclude or confirm PM. A benign CT report should not dissuade pleural sampling where the presence of primary or secondary pleural malignancy would alter management. Sensitivity is lower with non-thoracic radiology reporting and particularly low using CTPA. Elsevier Scientific Publishers 2017-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5226066/ /pubmed/28024694 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2016.11.010 Text en © 2016 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Tsim, Selina
Stobo, David B.
Alexander, Laura
Kelly, Caroline
Blyth, Kevin G.
The diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported computed tomography imaging in patients presenting with suspected pleural malignancy
title The diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported computed tomography imaging in patients presenting with suspected pleural malignancy
title_full The diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported computed tomography imaging in patients presenting with suspected pleural malignancy
title_fullStr The diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported computed tomography imaging in patients presenting with suspected pleural malignancy
title_full_unstemmed The diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported computed tomography imaging in patients presenting with suspected pleural malignancy
title_short The diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported computed tomography imaging in patients presenting with suspected pleural malignancy
title_sort diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported computed tomography imaging in patients presenting with suspected pleural malignancy
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5226066/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28024694
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2016.11.010
work_keys_str_mv AT tsimselina thediagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy
AT stobodavidb thediagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy
AT alexanderlaura thediagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy
AT kellycaroline thediagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy
AT blythkeving thediagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy
AT tsimselina diagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy
AT stobodavidb diagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy
AT alexanderlaura diagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy
AT kellycaroline diagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy
AT blythkeving diagnosticperformanceofroutinelyacquiredandreportedcomputedtomographyimaginginpatientspresentingwithsuspectedpleuralmalignancy