Pathologies such as infections, or even tumors, crop up from time to time in patients examined for entirely unrelated issues. These “incidental findings” can put doctors-and patients-in a tight spot. How do they proceed with the patient, knowing that many of the asymptomatic signs of disease may never lead to clinical problems, or may simply be false positives?
Pathologies such as infections, or even tumors, crop up from time to time in patients examined for entirely unrelated issues. These “incidental findings” can put doctors-and patients-in a tight spot. How do they proceed with the patient, knowing that many of the asymptomatic signs of disease may never lead to clinical problems, or may simply be false positives?
For those who have run into this situation and chosen the path of less intervention, there is now research evidence that they likely did the right thing.
A paper in the Sept. 27 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine notes that although incidental findings, such as a tumor or infection, are uncovered on radiological exams in up to 40% of research participants, an expert panel determined that clinical action was justified in only 6.2% of the cases. And, of those who received treatment, only a miniscule number actually benefited.
Lead author Dr. Nicholas M. Orme, a resident in the department of general internal medicine at the Mayo Clinic, and colleagues documented incidental findings in 567 of 1426 subjects participating in research during January through March 2004. Each image was interpreted by a radiologist the day it was performed. Just 35 of these 567 subjects ultimately received medical treatment for the incidental finding during a three-year follow-up period. Only six of these 35, less than 1% of all subjects with incidental findings, gained any clear medical benefit from the intervention. Three of the 35 carried a “medical burden” as a result.
The incidental findings noted in the paper were most often found on CT scans of the abdomen and pelvis, followed by CT of the chest, and MRI of the head. The risk of an incidental finding was determined to increase with age. Incidental findings, the authors say, raise the potential for early diagnosis of asymptomatic life-threatening disease, but also invite costly, invasive, and ultimately unnecessary interventions for benign processes.
Leading Breast Radiologists Discuss the USPSTF Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations
May 17th 2024In recognition of National Women’s Health Week, Dana Bonaminio, MD, Amy Patel, MD, and Stacy Smith-Foley, MD, shared their thoughts and perspectives on the recently updated breast cancer screening recommendations from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).
Multicenter CT Study Shows Benefits of Emerging Diagnostic Model for Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma
May 15th 2024Combining clinical and CT features, adjunctive use of a classification and regression tree (CART) diagnostic model demonstrated AUCs for detecting clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) that were 15 to 22 percent higher than unassisted radiologist assessments.
CT Study: AI Algorithm Comparable to Radiologists in Differentiating Small Renal Masses
May 14th 2024An emerging deep learning algorithm had a lower AUC and sensitivity than urological radiologists for differentiating between small renal masses on computed tomography (CT) scans but had a 21 percent higher sensitivity rate than non-urological radiologists, according to new research.