Can PET/CT be used more effectively in pleural effusion evaluation?
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 1, 2025

Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound in Adults: Image Acquisition
Published on: March 3, 2023
Fikri Selcuk Simsek1, Dogangun Yuksel2, Olga Yaylali2
1Nuclear Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Turkey. fselcuksimsek@gmail.com.
Purpose:
Sometimes, characterization of pleural effusion (PE) can be challenging especially in patients whom invasive procedures/recurrent invasive procedures cannot be performed. The main purpose of the study is to answer this question, Can 18F-FDG-PET/CT contribute to reduction in the number of invasive procedures or patients undergoing to invasive procedures? Results may increase the effectiveness of patient management by facilitating clinical decision-making, especially in patients who cannot undergo invasive/recurrent invasive procedures.
Methods:
Sixty-seven patients' 18F-FDG-PET/CT, pleural fluid cytologies (PFCs) and, if any, pleural biopsies were re-assessed. If patient's PFC/biopsy was malignant, effusion was considered as malignant. If two consecutive PFCs were negative in patients without biopsy, effusion was considered as benign. Characterization was based on consensus with baseline/follow-up 18F-FDG-PET/CT and clinical parameters in patients with one negative PFC (n = 6).
Results:
None of the 18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters could characterize PE alone. However, if PE maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) > 1.3 or PE SUVmax/mean standardized uptake value of mediastinal blood pool (MBP SUVmean) > 1.2 was combined with at least one of the following, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were 100%, accuracy was around 90%. Diffuse-nodular/nodular pleural thickness, post-obstructive atelectasis, nodule/mass with SUVmax > 2.5 in lung, multiple pulmonary nodules. All 29 patients who had SUVmax > 1.3 together with at least one of the mentioned four parameters diagnosed malignant pleural effusion (MPE). However, sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) were still insufficient.
Conclusion:
Patients who have contraindications for invasive diagnostic methods, and meet the aforementioned criteria may be considered as MPE primarily. On the other hand, if PE SUVmax < 1.3 or PE SUVmax/MBP SUVmean < 1.2 with the negativity of the all four parameters mentioned above, it is difficult to say that this can be considered as benign pleural effusion (BPE) according to our results.
Related Concept Videos
Pleural Effusion II: Symptoms and Management
A pleural effusion is the abnormal collection of fluid between the parietal and visceral pleura layers of tissue that form the lining of the lungs and chest cavity. It can occur independently or due to surrounding parenchymal diseases, such as infection, malignancy, or inflammatory conditions.
Clinical Manifestations:
Pleural Effusion I: Introduction
There are two main types of pleural effusion: transudative and exudative. They are differentiated using Light's...
Physical Assessment of the Respiratory Tract II: Palpation
Thoracic Palpation
Thoracic palpation detects tenderness, masses, lesions, respiratory excursions, and vocal fremitus. The nurse assesses...
Pulmonary Embolism II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
Pneumothorax-II
Clinical Manifestations:
Radiological Investigation III: Pulmonary Angiogram and PET Scan
Pulmonary Angiogram
A Pulmonary Angiogram is an invasive procedure involving injecting a contrast medium through a catheter threaded into the pulmonary artery or the right side of the heart to visualize the pulmonary vasculature. Computed Tomography (CT) scans have mainly replaced this...

