Incidentally Detected Indeterminate Pulmonary Nodule

Variant: 1 Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.

Procedure	Appropriateness Category	Relative Radiation Level
CT chest without IV contrast	Usually Appropriate	☢☢☢
Radiography chest	May Be Appropriate	☢
Image-guided transthoracic needle biopsy	Usually Not Appropriate	Varies
MRI chest without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
MRI chest without IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
CT chest with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
CT chest without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
FDG-PET/MRI whole body	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
FDG-PET/CT whole body	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢☢

Variant: 2 Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.

Procedure	Appropriateness Category	Relative Radiation Level
CT chest without IV contrast	May Be Appropriate	☢☢☢
Radiography chest	Usually Not Appropriate	☢
Image-guided transthoracic needle biopsy	Usually Not Appropriate	Varies
MRI chest without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
MRI chest without IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
CT chest with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
CT chest without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
FDG-PET/MRI whole body	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
FDG-PET/CT whole body	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢☢

Variant: 3 Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule equal to or greater than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.

Procedure	Appropriateness Category	Relative Radiation Level
CT chest without IV contrast	Usually Appropriate	☢☢☢
FDG-PET/CT whole body	Usually Appropriate	☢☢☢☢
Image-guided transthoracic needle biopsy	May Be Appropriate	Varies
Radiography chest	Usually Not Appropriate	☢
MRI chest without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
MRI chest without IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
CT chest with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
CT chest without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
FDG-PET/MRI whole body	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢

Variant: 4 Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on incomplete thoracic CT (eg, CT abdomen, neck, spine, etc). Next imaging study.

Procedure	Appropriateness Category	Relative Radiation Level
CT chest without IV contrast	Usually Appropriate	☢☢☢
Radiography chest	Usually Not Appropriate	☢
Image-guided transthoracic needle biopsy	Usually Not Appropriate	Varies
MRI chest without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
MRI chest without IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
CT chest with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
CT chest without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
FDG-PET/CT whole body	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢☢

Panel Members

Summary of Literature Review

Introduction/Background

Special Imaging Considerations

Discussion of Procedures by Variant

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.
A. CT Chest Without IV Contrast

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.
B. CT Chest Without and With IV Contrast

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.
C. CT Chest With IV Contrast

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.
D. FDG-PET/CT Whole Body

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.
E. FDG-PET/MRI Whole Body

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.
F. Image-Guided Transthoracic Needle Biopsy

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.
G. MRI Chest Without IV Contrast

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.
H. MRI Chest Without and With IV Contrast

Variant 1: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on chest radiograph. Next imaging study.
I. Radiography Chest

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
A. CT Chest Without IV Contrast

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
B. CT Chest Without and With IV Contrast

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
C. CT Chest With IV Contrast

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
D. FDG-PET/CT Whole Body

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
E. FDG-PET/MRI Whole Body

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
F. Image-Guided Transthoracic Needle Biopsy

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
G. MRI Chest Without IV Contrast

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
H. MRI Chest Without and With IV Contrast

Variant 2: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule less than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
I. Radiography Chest

Variant 3: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule equal to or greater than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.

Variant 3: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule equal to or greater than 6 mm on chest CT. Next imaging study.
A. CT Chest Without IV Contrast

Variant 4: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on incomplete thoracic CT (eg, CT abdomen, neck, spine, etc). Next imaging study.

Variant 4: Adult greater than or equal to 35 years of age. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on incomplete thoracic CT (eg, CT abdomen, neck, spine, etc). Next imaging study.
A. CT Chest Without IV Contrast

Summary of Recommendations

Supporting Documents

The evidence table, literature search, and appendix for this topic are available at https://acsearch.acr.org/list. The appendix includes the strength of evidence assessment and the final rating round tabulations for each recommendation.

For additional information on the Appropriateness Criteria methodology and other supporting documents, please go to the ACR website at https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Clinical-Tools-and-Reference/Appropriateness-Criteria.

Appropriateness Category Names and Definitions

Appropriateness Category Name	Appropriateness Rating	Appropriateness Category Definition
Usually Appropriate	7, 8, or 9	The imaging procedure or treatment is indicated in the specified clinical scenarios at a favorable risk-benefit ratio for patients.
May Be Appropriate	4, 5, or 6	The imaging procedure or treatment may be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios as an alternative to imaging procedures or treatments with a more favorable risk-benefit ratio, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is equivocal.
May Be Appropriate (Disagreement)	5	The individual ratings are too dispersed from the panel median. The different label provides transparency regarding the panel’s recommendation. “May be appropriate” is the rating category and a rating of 5 is assigned.
Usually Not Appropriate	1, 2, or 3	The imaging procedure or treatment is unlikely to be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is likely to be unfavorable.

Relative Radiation Level Information

Potential adverse health effects associated with radiation exposure are an important factor to consider when selecting the appropriate imaging procedure. Because there is a wide range of radiation exposures associated with different diagnostic procedures, a relative radiation level (RRL) indication has been included for each imaging examination. The RRLs are based on effective dose, which is a radiation dose quantity that is used to estimate population total radiation risk associated with an imaging procedure. Patients in the pediatric age group are at inherently higher risk from exposure, because of both organ sensitivity and longer life expectancy (relevant to the long latency that appears to accompany radiation exposure). For these reasons, the RRL dose estimate ranges for pediatric examinations are lower as compared with those specified for adults (see Table below). Additional information regarding radiation dose assessment for imaging examinations can be found in the ACR Appropriateness Criteria^® Radiation Dose Assessment Introduction document.

Relative Radiation Level Designations
Relative Radiation Level*	Adult Effective Dose Estimate Range	Pediatric Effective Dose Estimate Range
O	0 mSv	0 mSv
☢	<0.1 mSv	<0.03 mSv
☢☢	0.1-1 mSv	0.03-0.3 mSv
☢☢☢	1-10 mSv	0.3-3 mSv
☢☢☢☢	10-30 mSv	3-10 mSv
☢☢☢☢☢	30-100 mSv	10-30 mSv
*RRL assignments for some of the examinations cannot be made, because the actual patient doses in these procedures vary as a function of a number of factors (e.g., region of the body exposed to ionizing radiation, the imaging guidance that is used). The RRLs for these examinations are designated as “Varies.”

References

1.	Alvarez Martinez CJ, Bastarrika Aleman G, Disdier Vicente C, et al. Guideline on management of solitary pulmonary nodule. Arch Bronconeumol. 50(7):285-93, 2014 Jul.
2.	Gould MK, Donington J, Lynch WR, et al. Evaluation of individuals with pulmonary nodules: when is it lung cancer? Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. [Review]. Chest. 143(5 Suppl):e93S-e120S, 2013 May.
3.	Hansell DM, Bankier AA, MacMahon H, McLoud TC, Muller NL, Remy J. Fleischner Society: glossary of terms for thoracic imaging. Radiology. 2008; 246(3):697-722.
4.	Ko JP, Azour L. Management of Incidental Lung Nodules. [Review]. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 39(3):249-259, 2018 Jun.
5.	Patel VK, Naik SK, Naidich DP, et al. A practical algorithmic approach to the diagnosis and management of solitary pulmonary nodules: part 1: radiologic characteristics and imaging modalities. Chest 2013;143:825-39.
6.	Gould MK, Tang T, Liu IL, et al. Recent Trends in the Identification of Incidental Pulmonary Nodules. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 192(10):1208-14, 2015 Nov 15.
7.	Mortani Barbosa EJ Jr, Kelly K. Statistical modeling can determine what factors are predictive of appropriate follow-up in patients presenting with incidental pulmonary nodules on CT. Eur J Radiol. 128:109062, 2020 Jul.
8.	Madariaga ML, Lennes IT, Best T, et al. Multidisciplinary selection of pulmonary nodules for surgical resection: Diagnostic results and long-term outcomes. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 159(4):1558-1566.e3, 2020 04.
9.	MacMahon H, Naidich DP, Goo JM, et al. Guidelines for Management of Incidental Pulmonary Nodules Detected on CT Images: From the Fleischner Society 2017. Radiology. 284(1):228-243, 2017 07.
10.	Bueno J, Landeras L, Chung JH. Updated Fleischner Society Guidelines for Managing Incidental Pulmonary Nodules: Common Questions and Challenging Scenarios. Radiographics. 38(5):1337-1350, 2018 Sep-Oct.
11.	American College of Radiology Committee on Lung-RADS®. Lung-RADS Assessment Categories version1.1. Available at https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/RADS/Lung-RADS/LungRADSAssessmentCategoriesv1-1.pdf .
12.	Munden RF, Black WC, Hartman TE, et al. Managing Incidental Findings on Thoracic CT: Lung Findings. A White Paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee. J Am Coll Radiol 2021;18:1267-79.
13.	Endo K, Kaneko A, Horiuchi Y, Kasuga N, Ishizaki U, Sakai S. Detectability of pulmonary nodules on chest radiographs: bone suppression versus standard technique with single versus dual monitors for visualization. Jpn J Radiol. 38(7):676-682, 2020 Jul.
14.	Monnier-Cholley L, Arrive L, Porcel A, et al. Characteristics of missed lung cancer on chest radiographs: a French experience. Eur Radiol 2001;11:597-605.
15.	Shah PK, Austin JH, White CS, et al. Missed non-small cell lung cancer: radiographic findings of potentially resectable lesions evident only in retrospect. Radiology 2003;226:235-41.
16.	Stitik FP, Tockman MS. Radiographic screening in the early detection of lung cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 1978;16:347-66.
17.	Miyoshi T, Yoshida J, Aramaki N, et al. Effectiveness of Bone Suppression Imaging in the Detection of Lung Nodules on Chest Radiographs: Relevance to Anatomic Location and Observer's Experience. J Thorac Imaging. 32(6):398-405, 2017 Nov.
18.	Cai J, Xu D, Liu S, Cham MD. The Added Value of Computer-aided Detection of Small Pulmonary Nodules and Missed Lung Cancers. [Review]. J Thorac Imaging. 33(6):390-395, 2018 Nov.
19.	Godoy MC, Kim TJ, White CS, et al. Benefit of computer-aided detection analysis for the detection of subsolid and solid lung nodules on thin- and thick-section CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 200(1):74-83, 2013 Jan.
20.	Rubin GD. Lung nodule and cancer detection in computed tomography screening. [Review]. J Thorac Imaging. 30(2):130-8, 2015 Mar.
21.	Lo SB, Freedman MT, Gillis LB, White CS, Mun SK. JOURNAL CLUB: Computer-Aided Detection of Lung Nodules on CT With a Computerized Pulmonary Vessel Suppressed Function. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 210(3):480-488, 2018 Mar.
22.	Milanese G, Eberhard M, Martini K, Vittoria De Martini I, Frauenfelder T. Vessel suppressed chest Computed Tomography for semi-automated volumetric measurements of solid pulmonary nodules. Eur J Radiol. 101:97-102, 2018 Apr.
23.	Sim Y, Chung MJ, Kotter E, et al. Deep Convolutional Neural Network-based Software Improves Radiologist Detection of Malignant Lung Nodules on Chest Radiographs. Radiology. 294(1):199-209, 2020 01.
24.	Yoo H, Kim KH, Singh R, Digumarthy SR, Kalra MK. Validation of a Deep Learning Algorithm for the Detection of Malignant Pulmonary Nodules in Chest Radiographs. JAMA netw. open. 3(9):e2017135, 2020 09 01.
25.	Erasmus JJ, Connolly JE, McAdams HP, Roggli VL. Solitary pulmonary nodules: Part I. Morphologic evaluation for differentiation of benign and malignant lesions. Radiographics 2000;20:43-58.
26.	Truong MT, Ko JP, Rossi SE, et al. Update in the evaluation of the solitary pulmonary nodule. [Review]. Radiographics. 34(6):1658-79, 2014 Oct.
27.	Cohen JG, Reymond E, Jankowski A, et al. Lung adenocarcinomas: correlation of computed tomography and pathology findings. [Review]. Diagn Interv Imaging. 97(10):955-963, 2016 Oct.
28.	Callister ME, Baldwin DR, Akram AR, et al. British Thoracic Society guidelines for the investigation and management of pulmonary nodules. Thorax. 70 Suppl 2:ii1-ii54, 2015 Aug.
29.	Jeong YJ, Lee KS, Jeong SY, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodule: characterization with combined wash-in and washout features at dynamic multi-detector row CT. Radiology. 2005; 237(2):675-683.
30.	Swensen SJ, Viggiano RW, Midthun DE, et al. Lung nodule enhancement at CT: multicenter study. Radiology. 2000; 214(1):73-80.
31.	Yi CA, Lee KS, Kim EA, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodules: dynamic enhanced multi-detector row CT study and comparison with vascular endothelial growth factor and microvessel density. Radiology. 2004; 233(1):191-199.
32.	Yi CA, Lee KS, Kim BT, et al. Tissue characterization of solitary pulmonary nodule: comparative study between helical dynamic CT and integrated PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2006;47:443-50.
33.	Chilet-Rosell E, Parker LA, Hernandez-Aguado I, et al. Differences in the clinical management of women and men after detection of a solitary pulmonary nodule in clinical practice. European Radiology. 30(8):4390-4397, 2020 Aug.
34.	Bohlsen D, Talakic E, Fritz GA, Quehenberger F, Tillich M, Schoellnast H. First pass dual input volume CT-perfusion of lung lesions: The influence of the CT- value range settings on the perfusion values of benign and malignant entities. Eur J Radiol. 85(6):1109-14, 2016 Jun.
35.	Cohen JG, Goo JM, Yoo RE, et al. The effect of late-phase contrast enhancement on semi-automatic software measurements of CT attenuation and volume of part-solid nodules in lung adenocarcinomas. Eur J Radiol. 85(6):1174-80, 2016 Jun.
36.	Christensen JA, Nathan MA, Mullan BP, Hartman TE, Swensen SJ, Lowe VJ. Characterization of the solitary pulmonary nodule: 18F-FDG PET versus nodule-enhancement CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 187(5):1361-1367.
37.	Swensen SJ, Yamashita K, McCollough CH, et al. Lung nodules: dual-kilovolt peak analysis with CT--multicenter study. Radiology 2000;214:81-5.
38.	Chae EJ, Song JW, Seo JB, Krauss B, Jang YM, Song KS. Clinical utility of dual-energy CT in the evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules: initial experience. Radiology. 2008; 249(2):671-681.
39.	American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria®: Clinically Suspected Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformation (PAVM). Available at: https://acsearch.acr.org/docs/3094113/Narrative/.
40.	Nair VS, Sundaram V, Gould MK, Desai M. Use of [(18)F]Fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose Positron Emission Tomographic Imaging in the National Lung Screening Trial. Chest. 150(3):621-30, 2016 09.
41.	Erasmus JJ, McAdams HP, Patz EF, Jr., Coleman RE, Ahuja V, Goodman PC. Evaluation of primary pulmonary carcinoid tumors using FDG PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:1369-73.
42.	Yap CS, Schiepers C, Fishbein MC, Phelps ME, Czernin J. FDG-PET imaging in lung cancer: how sensitive is it for bronchioloalveolar carcinoma? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1166-73.
43.	Sathekge MM, Maes A, Pottel H, Stoltz A, van de Wiele C. Dual time-point FDG PET-CT for differentiating benign from malignant solitary pulmonary nodules in a TB endemic area. S Afr Med J 2010;100:598-601.
44.	Deppen SA, Blume JD, Kensinger CD, et al. Accuracy of FDG-PET to diagnose lung cancer in areas with infectious lung disease: a meta-analysis. [Review]. JAMA. 312(12):1227-36, 2014 Sep 24.
45.	Reyes N, Onadeko OO, Luraschi-Monjagatta Mdel C, et al. Positron emission tomography in the evaluation of pulmonary nodules among patients living in a coccidioidal endemic region. Lung. 192(4):589-93, 2014 Aug.
46.	Fendler WP, Czernin J, Herrmann K, Beyer T. Variations in PET/MRI Operations: Results from an International Survey Among 39 Active Sites. J Nucl Med 2016;57:2016-21.
47.	Biondetti P, Vangel MG, Lahoud RM, et al. PET/MRI assessment of lung nodules in primary abdominal malignancies: sensitivity and outcome analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 48(6):1976-1986, 2021 06.
48.	Dahlsgaard-Wallenius SE, Hildebrandt MG, Johansen A, et al. Hybrid PET/MRI in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and lung nodules-a literature review. [Review]. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 48(2):584-591, 2021 02.
49.	Riola-Parada C, Garcia-Canamaque L, Perez-Duenas V, Garcerant-Tafur M, Carreras-Delgado JL. Simultaneous PET/MRI vs PET/CT in oncology. A systematic review. [Review]. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 35(5):306-12, 2016 Sep-Oct.
50.	Sawicki LM, Grueneisen J, Buchbender C, et al. Evaluation of the Outcome of Lung Nodules Missed on 18F-FDG PET/MRI Compared with 18F-FDG PET/CT in Patients with Known Malignancies. J Nucl Med. 57(1):15-20, 2016 Jan.
51.	Kolderman NC, Cheti DR, Hasbrook CD, et al. Pneumothorax Rate and Diagnostic Adequacy of Computed Tomography-guided Lung Nodule Biopsies Performed With 18 G Versus 20 G Needles: A Cross-Sectional Study. J Thorac Imaging. 35(4):265-269, 2020 Jul.
52.	Liu GS, Wang SQ, Liu HL, Liu Y, Fu YF, Shi YB. Computed Tomography-Guided Biopsy for Small (<=20 mm) Lung Nodules: A Meta-Analysis. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 44(6):841-846, 2020 Nov/Dec.
53.	Portela de Oliveira E, Souza CA, Inacio JR, et al. Imaging-guided Percutaneous Biopsy of Nodules <=1 cm: Study of Diagnostic Performance and Risk Factors Associated With Biopsy Failure. J Thorac Imaging. 35(2):123-128, 2020 Mar.
54.	Ohno Y, Kauczor HU, Hatabu H, Seo JB, van Beek EJR, International Workshop for Pulmonary Functional Imaging (IWPFI). MRI for solitary pulmonary nodule and mass assessment: Current state of the art. [Review]. J Magn Reson Imaging. 47(6):1437-1458, 2018 06.
55.	Zhang HF, Zeng XT, Xing F, Fan N, Liao MY. The diagnostic accuracy of CT-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy and fine needle aspiration in pulmonary lesions: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol. 71(1):e1-10, 2016 Jan.
56.	Heerink WJ, de Bock GH, de Jonge GJ, Groen HJ, Vliegenthart R, Oudkerk M. Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2017;27:138-48.
57.	Cha MJ, Park HJ, Paek MY, et al. Free-breathing ultrashort echo time lung magnetic resonance imaging using stack-of-spirals acquisition: A feasibility study in oncology patients. Magn Reson Imaging. 51:137-143, 2018 09.
58.	Heye T, Sommer G, Miedinger D, Bremerich J, Bieri O. Ultrafast 3D balanced steady-state free precession MRI of the lung: Assessment of anatomic details in comparison to low-dose CT. J Magn Reson Imaging. 42(3):602-9, 2015 Sep.
59.	Ohno Y, Koyama H, Yoshikawa T, et al. Standard-, Reduced-, and No-Dose Thin-Section Radiologic Examinations: Comparison of Capability for Nodule Detection and Nodule Type Assessment in Patients Suspected of Having Pulmonary Nodules. Radiology 2017;284:562-73.
60.	Schroeder T, Ruehm SG, Debatin JF, Ladd ME, Barkhausen J, Goehde SC. Detection of pulmonary nodules using a 2D HASTE MR sequence: comparison with MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 185(4):979-984.
61.	Regier M, Schwarz D, Henes FO, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR-imaging for the detection of pulmonary nodules at 1.5 Tesla: intraindividual comparison with multidetector computed tomography. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2011;55:266-74.
62.	Basso Dias A, Zanon M, Altmayer S, et al. Fluorine 18-FDG PET/CT and Diffusion-weighted MRI for Malignant versus Benign Pulmonary Lesions: A Meta-Analysis. Radiology 2019;290:525-34.
63.	Koo CW, White DB, Lingineni RK, et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Part-solid Nodules: A Pilot Study. J Thorac Imaging. 31(1):2-10, 2016 Jan.
64.	Bartholmai BJ, Koo CW, Johnson GB, et al. Pulmonary nodule characterization, including computer analysis and quantitative features. [Review]. J Thorac Imaging. 30(2):139-56, 2015 Mar.
65.	Schaefer JF, Vollmar J, Schick F, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodules: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging--perfusion differences in malignant and benign lesions. Radiology. 2004; 232(2):544-553.
66.	Coolen J, Vansteenkiste J, De Keyzer F, et al. Characterisation of solitary pulmonary lesions combining visual perfusion and quantitative diffusion MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2014;24:531-41.
67.	Hussien AF, Jeudy J, Kligerman SJ, White CS. Thoracic Incidental Findings in Preoperative Computed Tomography Evaluation for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI). J Thorac Imaging. 31(3):183-8, 2016 May.
68.	Markowiak T, Holzamer A, Hilker M, et al. Incidental thoracic findings in computed tomography scans before transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 28(4):559-565, 2019 04 01.
69.	Robertson J, Nicholls S, Bardin P, Ptasznik R, Steinfort D, Miller A. Incidental Pulmonary Nodules Are Common on CT Coronary Angiogram and Have a Significant Cost Impact. Heart Lung Circ. 28(2):295-301, 2019 Feb.
70.	Scholtz JE, Lu MT, Hedgire S, et al. Incidental pulmonary nodules in emergent coronary CT angiography for suspected acute coronary syndrome: Impact of revised 2017 Fleischner Society Guidelines. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 12(1):28-33, 2018 Jan - Feb.
71.	Schmidt LH, Vietmeier B, Kaleschke G, et al. Thoracic Malignancies and Pulmonary Nodules in Patients under Evaluation for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): Incidence, Follow Up and Possible Impact on Treatment Decision. PLoS ONE [Electronic Resource]. 11(5):e0155398, 2016.PLoS ONE. 11(5):e0155398, 2016.
72.	Lacson R, Prevedello LM, Andriole KP, et al. Factors associated with radiologists' adherence to Fleischner Society guidelines for management of pulmonary nodules. J. Am. Coll. Radiol.. 9(7):468-73, 2012 Jul.
73.	Rinaldi MF, Bartalena T, Giannelli G, et al. Incidental lung nodules on CT examinations of the abdomen: prevalence and reporting rates in the PACS era. Eur J Radiol 2010;74:e84-8.
74.	Wu CC, Cronin CG, Chu JT, et al. Incidental pulmonary nodules detected on abdominal computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 36(6):641-5, 2012 Nov-Dec.
75.	American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiation Dose Assessment Introduction. Available at: https://edge.sitecorecloud.io/americancoldf5f-acrorgf92a-productioncb02-3650/media/ACR/Files/Clinical/Appropriateness-Criteria/ACR-Appropriateness-Criteria-Radiation-Dose-Assessment-Introduction.pdf.

Disclaimer

The ACR Committee on Appropriateness Criteria and its expert panels have developed criteria for determining appropriate imaging examinations for diagnosis and treatment of specified medical condition(s). These criteria are intended to guide radiologists, radiation oncologists and referring physicians in making decisions regarding radiologic imaging and treatment. Generally, the complexity and severity of a patient’s clinical condition should dictate the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Only those examinations generally used for evaluation of the patient’s condition are ranked. Other imaging studies necessary to evaluate other co-existent diseases or other medical consequences of this condition are not considered in this document. The availability of equipment or personnel may influence the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Imaging techniques classified as investigational by the FDA have not been considered in developing these criteria; however, study of new equipment and applications should be encouraged. The ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of any specific radiologic examination or treatment must be made by the referring physician and radiologist in light of all the circumstances presented in an individual examination.

Appendix 1. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule <6 mm on chest CT

Appendix 2. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule ≥6 mm on chest CT

Appendix 3. Incidentally detected indeterminate pulmonary nodule on incomplete thoracic CT (eg, CT abdomen, neck, spine, etc)