scholarly journals Frequency and clinical significance of incidental findings detected in Internal Acoustic Canal MRIs of patients with audiovestibular symptoms

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nebil Eker
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Significance ◽  
Incidental Findings ◽  
Internal Acoustic Canal

scholarly journals Incidental abnormal CT scan findings during transcatheter aortic valve implantation assessment: incidence and implications

Open Heart ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. e000855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akshay Patel ◽  
Kajan Mahendran ◽  
Michael Collins ◽  
Mahmoud Abdelaziz ◽  
Saib Khogali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Clinical Significance ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation ◽  
Incidental Findings ◽  
Mortality Data ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Aortic Valve Implantation ◽  
Valve Implantation

ObjectivesThe aim of this retrospective series is to describe the prevalence and clinical significance of the incidental findings found during pre–transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) work-up and to ascertain the clinical course of such patients.MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing TAVI from 2013 to 2015 where a TAVI CT assessment was performed (n=138) were included in the study. All incidental findings that were not expected from the patient’s history were discussed at the TAVI multidisciplinary meeting in order to ascertain the clinical significance of said findings and whether they would alter the proposed course of treatment. Mortality data were determined by careful retrospective case note and follow-up appointment analysis.ResultsSeventy-eight patients (57%) were found to have incidental findings on pre-TAVI CT scan. The majority of patients had benign pathology with high incidence in particular of diverticular disease, pleural effusions, gallstones, hiatus hernia and degenerative spinal disease. Vascular pathology such as superior mesenteric, renal and iliac artery stenoses and abdominal aortic aneurysm was detected in seven patients. In terms of long-term mortality data, we found no significant difference between those with incidental findings and those without (p=0.48). Survival as assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference between those with and without incidental abnormal CT scan findings (p=0.98).ConclusionsIncidental findings with potential for malignancy are common in an elderly, comorbid population. Ultimately, clinical correlation and prognosis must be swiftly ascertained in order to streamline the patients down the appropriate management pathway while avoiding unnecessary delay for treatment of their aortic stenosis.

Prevalence and clinical significance of incidental findings on multiparametric prostate MRI

2019 ◽  
Vol 125 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-213
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Cutaia ◽  
Gaetano Tosto ◽  
Roberto Cannella ◽  
Alberto Bruno ◽  
Claudio Leto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Significance ◽  
Incidental Findings ◽  
Prostate Mri ◽  
Multiparametric Prostate Mri

Frequency, Cost, and Clinical Significance of Incidental Findings on Preoperative Planning Images for Computer-Assisted Total Joint Arthroplasty

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 945-949.e1
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D. Hassebrock ◽  
Justin L. Makovicka ◽  
Henry D. Clarke ◽  
Mark J. Spangehl ◽  
Christopher P. Beauchamp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Significance ◽  
Total Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Incidental Findings ◽  
Preoperative Planning ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Computer Assisted

scholarly journals Clinical significance of incidental findings on staging positron emission tomography for oesophagogastric malignancies

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
HL Adams ◽  
SS Jaunoo
Keyword(s):  
Positron Emission Tomography ◽  
Clinical Significance ◽  
Incidental Findings ◽  
Premalignant Lesion ◽  
Emission Tomography ◽  
Second Primary ◽  
Primary Cancer ◽  
Primary Malignancy ◽  
Gastrointestinal Malignancies ◽  
Positron Emission

Introduction The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the clinical significance of incidental findings detected on positron emission tomography (PET) in patients undergoing staging of oesophagogastric malignancies. Methods Patients with oesophagogastric malignancies who underwent PET between June 2007 and May 2012 were included in the study. PET was performed according to hospital protocol. All imaging was interpreted by two consultant radiologists in nuclear medicine. Incidental findings that were unrelated to the primary malignancy were recorded and patients were recommended to have further investigations (imaging, endoscopy and biopsy). Results Overall, 333 patients (240 male, 93 female; mean age: 67 years) with upper gastrointestinal malignancies were eligible for inclusion in the study. Eighty-nine of these patients had PET demonstrating one or more incidental findings. Two patients were found to have a second primary malignancy. One patient had a distant metastasis of his primary cancer and six patients had a premalignant lesion. Conclusions In this study, incidental findings were discovered in 26.7% of patients with known oesophagogastric cancer. A second primary cancer or premalignant lesion was found in 8.4% of patients with incidental findings. Patients with these findings should be investigated to rule out further malignancy. There were a high proportion of false positive results in our study. It is recommended that each patient is considered on an individual basis and assessed with simultaneous PET and computed tomography.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document