Size of tumour as a risk factor for malignancy in patients with peripheral pulmonary nodules

Georgi Tz. Prisadov1 / Angel P. Uchikov2 / Kathrin Welker3 / Herbert Wallimann4 / Krassimir A. Murdzhev5 / Vanya N. Uzunova6
1Clinic of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital, Bremen-East, Germany
2Clinic of Thoracoabdominal Surgery, Medical University, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
3Clinic of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital, Bremen-East, Germany
4Clinic of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital, Bremen-East, Germany
5Clinic of Thoracoabdominal Surgery, Medical University, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
6Clinic of Thoracoabdominal Surgery, Medical University, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
Correspondence and reprint request to: G. Prisadov, Clinic of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital,Bremen-East, Germany; E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; Tel: +49 421 408 61481Am Osterfeld 7-A, 28832 Achim, Deutschland

Citation Information: Folia Medica. Volume 54, Issue 2, Pages 17–21, ISSN (Online) 1314-2143, ISSN (Print) 0204-8043, DOI: 10.2478/v10153-011-0083-9, October 2012
Publication History:
Published Online:
2012-10-27

ABSTRACT

Peripheral pulmonary tumours are often quite difficult to diagnose and treat. Their detection brings immediately the problem of whether clinicians should just wait and observe or operate the patients.

The AIM of this study was to determine if there is a direct correlation between tumour size and the risk for malignancy and whether the tumor size should be considered a risk factor for malignancy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1997 and 2009, 145 patients with peripheral pulmonary tumours of less than 3 cm in diameter underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) resection for the purpose of histologic examination of the tumor.

RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 62.60 ± 0.95 years. The youngest patient was 17 years old and the oldest - 82. The study sample included 61 women and 84 men; the men were statistically signifi cantly more than the women (57.3% and 42.07%, respectively) (t = 2.74 , P < 0.01). The total number of patients we operated were 145 with 198 resected tumours. The diameter of the lesions ranged between 0.30 cm and 3 cm (mean 1.41 ± 0.06 cm). We found that 108 (54.55%) of the tumours were malignant, and 90 (45.45%) were benign, the difference between them failing to reach statistical signifi cance (t = 1.82, P > 0.05). The mean size of malignant lesions was statistically signifi cantly greater than that of benign tumours (1.62 ± 0.08 cm vs 1.15 ± 0.06 cm).

CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that the bigger the diameter of the nodule, the greater the percentage share of malignant tumours, which means that the size of the tumour is an important risk factor for malignancy.