Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Jul;41(7):843-50.
doi: 10.1007/s00256-011-1304-2. Epub 2011 Oct 16.

Indeterminate lesions on planar bone scintigraphy in lung cancer patients: SPECT, CT or SPECT-CT?

Punit Sharma  1 , Rakesh Kumar, Harmandeep Singh, Chandrasekhar Bal, Pramod Kumar Julka, Sanjay Thulkar, Arun Malhotra
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Indeterminate lesions on planar bone scintigraphy in lung cancer patients: SPECT, CT or SPECT-CT?

Punit Sharma et al. Skeletal Radiol. 2012 Jul.

Abstract

Objective: The objective of the present study was to compare the role of single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), computed tomography (CT) and SPECT-CT of selected volume in lung cancer patients with indeterminate lesions on planar bone scintigraphy (BS).

Methods: The data of 50 lung cancer patients (53 ± 10.3 years; range 30-75; male/female 38/12) with 65 indeterminate lesions on planar BS (January 2010 to November 2010) were retrospectively evaluated. All of them underwent SPECT-CT of a selected volume. SPECT, CT and SPECT-CT images were independently evaluated by two experienced readers (experience in musculoskeletal imaging, including CT: 5 and 7 years) in separate sessions. A scoring scale of 1 to 5 was used, in which 1 is definitely metastatic, 2 is probably metastatic, 3 is indeterminate, 4 is probably benign and 5 is definitely benign. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each modality, taking a score ≤2 as metastatic. With receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, areas under the curve (AUC) were calculated for each modality and compared. Clinical and imaging follow-up and/or histopathology were taken as reference standard.

Results: For both readers SPECT was inferior to CT (P = 0.004, P = 0.022) and SPECT-CT (P = 0.003, P = 0.037). However, no significant difference was found between CT and SPECT-CT for reader 1 (P = 0.847) and reader 2 (P = 0.592). The findings were similar for lytic as well as sclerotic lesions. Moderate inter-observer agreement was seen for SPECT images (к = 0.426), while almost perfect agreement was seen for CT (к = 0.834) and SPECT-CT (к = 0.971).

Conclusion: CT alone and SPECT-CT are better than SPECT for accurate characterisation of indeterminate lesions on planar BS in lung cancer patients. CT alone is not inferior to SPECT-CT for this purpose and might be preferred because of shorter acquisition time and wider availability.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Breast. 2008 Feb;17(1):98-103 - PubMed
    1. J Nucl Med. 2004 Feb;45(2):272-8 - PubMed
    1. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011 Mar-Apr;61(2):69-90 - PubMed
    1. APMIS. 1989 Aug;97(8):689-98 - PubMed
    1. Nucl Med Commun. 2004 Jul;25(7):705-10 - PubMed

Publication types