First author [Ref.] | Year | n | Method of analysis | Sensitivity % | Specificity % | Accuracy % | Prevalence % |
Sazon 30 | 1996 | 107 | Visual | 100 | 52 | 89 | 77 |
Lowe 31 | 1998 | 89 | Visual | 98 | 69 | 89 | 67 |
Semiquantitative | 92 | 90 | 91 | ||||
Duhaylongsod 32 | 1995 | 87 | Semiquantitative | 97 | 82 | 92 | 68 |
Gupta 33 | 1996 | 61 | Semiquantitative | 93 | 88 | 92 | 74 |
Nackaerts 34 | 1997 | 52 | Semiquantitative | 94 | 82 | 90 | 67 |
Patz 35 | 1993 | 51 | Semiquantitative | 89 | 100 | 92 | 65 |
Bury 36 | 1996 | 50 | Visual | 100 | 88 | 96 | 66 |
Slosman 37 | 1993 | 36 | Visual | 94 | 60 | 89 | 86 |
Dewan 38 | 1993 | 30 | Visual | 95 | 80 | 90 | 67 |
Kubota 39 | 1990 | 22 | Semiquantitative | 83 | 90 | 86 | 55 |
Gupta 40 | 1992 | 20 | Semiquantitative | 100 | 100 | 100 | 65 |
Gupta 41 | 1998 | 19 | Visual | 100 | 100 | 100 | 63 |
Semiquantitative | 83 | 100 | 89 |
Visual: visual interpretation on whole-body images; Semiquantitative: using a threshold of a semiquantitative measure of FDG-uptake (e.g. standardized uptake value); prevalence: proportion of malignant cases in the total group of studied nodules.