Correct!
5. Comparison to prior chest imaging studies

When an abnormal lung opacity, particularly an indeterminate solitary pulmonary nodule, is encountered at chest imaging studies, in nearly all circumstances comparison to prior imaging studies to assess for stability should be the first step in evaluation. While additional imaging studies are often helpful for determining further management, if an opacity shows long-term stability when compared to remote prior studies, as a rule, the evaluation approach can be tempered as the likelihood of an aggressive lesion is low. Furthermore, interventional approaches are usually not appropriate until an opacity has been thoroughly characterized with non-invasive approaches.
Prior chest radiography from over 2 years earlier was obtained for comparison (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Frontal (A) and lateral (B) chest radiography at presentation compared to over 2 years earlier (C and D).

Which of the following statements regarding the comparison between the current and previous chest radiographs is most accurate? (Click on the correct answer to be directed to the fourth of 12 pages)

  1. Comparison with previous chest radiography shows stable findings
  2. Comparison with previous chest radiography shows progressive enlargement of the anterior segment right upper lobe nodule
  3. Frontal chest radiography shows the anterior segment right upper lobe nodule is new
  4. Frontal chest radiography shows the anterior segment right upper lobe nodule has decreased in size
  5. Frontal chest radiography shows indeterminate findings and is therefore non-contributory

Home/Imaging