Detection, measurement, and diagnosis of lung nodules by ultra-low-dose CT in lung cancer screening: a systematic review
Zhijie Pan, Yaping Zhang, Lu Zhang, Lingyun Wang, Keke Zhao, Qingyao Li, Ai Wang, Yanfei Hu, Xueqian XieAbstract
Objective
There is a lack of recent meta-analyses and systematic reviews on the use of ultra-low-dose CT (ULDCT) for the detection, measurement, and diagnosis of lung nodules. This review aims to summarize the latest advances of ULDCT in these areas.
Methods
A systematic review of studies in PubMed and Web of Science was conducted, using search terms specific to ULDCT and lung nodules. The included studies were published in the last five years (January 2019 to August 2024). Two reviewers independently selected articles, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and concerns using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-II (QUADAS-II) tool. The standard-dose, low-dose, or contrast-enhanced CT served as the reference-standard CT to evaluate ULDCT.
Results
The literature search yielded 15 high-quality articles on a total of 1889 patients, of which ten, three, and two dealt with the detection, measurement, and diagnosis of lung nodules. QUADAS-II showed a generally low risk of bias. The mean radiation dose for ULDCT was 0.22 ± 0.10 mSv (7.7%) against 2.84 ± 1.80 mSv for reference-standard CT. Nodule detection rates ranged from 86.1% to 100%. The variability of diameter measurements ranged from 2.1% to 14.4% against contrast-enhanced CT and from 3.1% to 8.29% against standard CT. The diagnosis rate of malignant nodules ranged from 75% to 91%.
Conclusions
ULDCT proves effective in detecting lung nodules while substantially reducing radiation exposure. However, the use of ULDCT for the measurement and diagnosis of lung nodules remains challenging and requires further research.
Advances in knowledge
When ULDCT reduces radiation exposure to 7.7%, it detects lung nodules at a rate of 86.1%-100%, with a measurement variance of 2.1%-14.4% and a diagnostic accuracy for malignancy of 75%-91%, suggesting the potential for safe and effective lung cancer screening.