The prevalence and clinical significance of incidental non-cardiac findings on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and unreported rates of these findings in official radiology reports

F. Ufuk, H. G. Yavas, E. Sağtaş, I. Kilic
{"title":"The prevalence and clinical significance of incidental non-cardiac findings on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and unreported rates of these findings in official radiology reports","authors":"F. Ufuk, H. G. Yavas, E. Sağtaş, I. Kilic","doi":"10.5114/pjr.2022.115713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose To evaluate the prevalence and significance of incidental non-cardiac findings (NCFs) on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We also aimed to assess the unreported rate and clinical significance of NCFs in official radiological reports. Material and methods Consecutive cardiac MRI examinations of 400 patients were retrospectively analysed and MR images reviewed by 2 observers blinded to official radiology reports. NCFs were classified as insignificant, significant, and major. In patients with significant and major findings, NCFs were classified as previously known or unknown, based on clinical archive. Moreover, we investigated the clinical follow-up results of patients with major NCF. Results Of 400 patients, 137 patients (34.3%) had a total of 175 NCFs. Fifty-nine NCFs were considered significant, and 23 were major. Patients with NCFs were significantly older than those without (p < 0.0001). Of 82 significant and major NCFs, 25 were previously unknown. In total, 18 significant and 4 major NCFs were unreported in official MRI reports. The unreported major NCFs were portal vein thrombosis, pulmonary nodule, pulmonary embolism, and liver nodule. The most common unreported findings were pulmonary artery-aorta dilatation and hiatal hernia. No statistical difference was found between official MRI reports and second consensus reading for the detection of major NCFs (p = 0.082). Conclusions The frequency of significant and major NCFs increases with age. Although no statistical difference was found between official MRI reports and second consensus reading for the detection of major NCFs, extra-cardiac findings should be carefully investigated during assessment.","PeriodicalId":94174,"journal":{"name":"Polish journal of radiology","volume":"87 1","pages":"e207 - e214"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish journal of radiology","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr.2022.115713","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the prevalence and significance of incidental non-cardiac findings (NCFs) on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We also aimed to assess the unreported rate and clinical significance of NCFs in official radiological reports. Material and methods Consecutive cardiac MRI examinations of 400 patients were retrospectively analysed and MR images reviewed by 2 observers blinded to official radiology reports. NCFs were classified as insignificant, significant, and major. In patients with significant and major findings, NCFs were classified as previously known or unknown, based on clinical archive. Moreover, we investigated the clinical follow-up results of patients with major NCF. Results Of 400 patients, 137 patients (34.3%) had a total of 175 NCFs. Fifty-nine NCFs were considered significant, and 23 were major. Patients with NCFs were significantly older than those without (p < 0.0001). Of 82 significant and major NCFs, 25 were previously unknown. In total, 18 significant and 4 major NCFs were unreported in official MRI reports. The unreported major NCFs were portal vein thrombosis, pulmonary nodule, pulmonary embolism, and liver nodule. The most common unreported findings were pulmonary artery-aorta dilatation and hiatal hernia. No statistical difference was found between official MRI reports and second consensus reading for the detection of major NCFs (p = 0.082). Conclusions The frequency of significant and major NCFs increases with age. Although no statistical difference was found between official MRI reports and second consensus reading for the detection of major NCFs, extra-cardiac findings should be carefully investigated during assessment.
心脏磁共振成像中意外非心脏发现的流行程度和临床意义,以及官方放射学报告中未报道的这些发现的发生率
目的评估心脏磁共振成像(MRI)中偶然非心脏发现(NCF)的发生率和意义。我们还旨在评估官方放射学报告中NCF的未报告率和临床意义。材料和方法对400例患者的连续心脏MRI检查进行回顾性分析,并由2名不了解官方放射学报告的观察者审查MR图像。NCF分为不显著、显著和主要。在有重大和重大发现的患者中,根据临床档案,将NCF分为先前已知或未知。此外,我们调查了严重NCF患者的临床随访结果。结果在400例患者中,137例(34.3%)患者共有175例NCFs。59个NCF被认为是重大的,23个是重大的。患有NCFs的患者明显比没有NCFs患者年龄大(p<0.0001)。在82例显著和主要的NCFs中,25例以前未知。官方MRI报告中总共有18例重大和4例重大NCF未报告。未报告的主要NCF为门静脉血栓形成、肺结节、肺栓塞和肝结节。最常见的未报告的发现是肺动脉主动脉扩张和裂孔疝。在检测主要NCF的官方MRI报告和第二次一致性读数之间没有发现统计学差异(p=0.082)。结论显著和主要NCFs的频率随着年龄的增长而增加。尽管在检测主要NCF的官方MRI报告和第二次共识读数之间没有发现统计差异,但在评估过程中应仔细调查心脏外检查结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信