Incidental findings on whole-body computed tomography in trauma patients: the current state of incidental findings and the effect of implementation of a feedback system

Incidental Renal Cysts Found by Point-of-Care Ultrasound: A Retrospective Chart Review

BACKGROUND

Incidental findings are unrelated to a patient's complaint, found on diagnostic imaging, such as point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). Incidental findings represent potential harms to patients and may lead to increased patient anxiety and health care costs related to downstream testing and surveillance.

STUDY OBJECTIVES

In this study, we aimed to calculate the rate of incidental renal cysts found by POCUS. Further, we hoped to describe how emergency physicians relay the findings to patients. Lastly, we hoped to examine if patients suffered harms in the 12 months following identification of an incidental renal cyst.

METHODS

From our single-center, academic emergency department (ED), we reviewed renal POCUS images from 1000 consecutive adult ED patients to determine if there was a renal cyst. Next, we performed manual chart review to determine if patients were informed of the incidental renal cyst or suffered any patient harms.

RESULTS

We found the prevalence of renal cysts to be 6.5% (95% confidence interval: 4.9%-8.4%). Those with cysts were more likely to be older compared to those without (63 ± 14 vs. 49 ± 15 years of age). Only 8% of patients had evidence that they were informed of their incidental renal cyst. No patients received a biopsy or were diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma or polycystic kidney disease.

CONCLUSION

Incidental renal cysts are common and are more likely to be found in older adults. In our study, physicians infrequently informed patients of their incidental finding.

Prevalence and clinical significance of incidental findings in chest and abdominopelvic CT scans of trauma patients; A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Imaging may inadvertently reveal pathologies unrelated to their performing purpose, known as incidental findings (IF). This study aimed to assess the prevalence, clinical significance, and documentation of IFs in chest and abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) scans of trauma patients.

METHODS

This observational study was conducted at two urban level-1 trauma centers from March 2019 through April 2022. Official radiology reports of trauma patients who underwent chest and/or abdominopelvic CT scans at the emergency department (ED) were explored, and IF were extracted. Predictive factors of the presence of IFs and their documenting were investigated.

RESULTS

Out of 656 chest and 658 abdominopelvic CT scans, 167 (25.37%) and 212 (32.31%) scans harbored at least one IF, respectively. Patients with IFs tended to be of higher age and female in both chest (age: 48 [IQR: 35-62] vs. 34 [IQR: 25-42.5]; female: 31.14% vs 14.66%, p < 0.001 for both) and abdominopelvic CT scans (age: 41 [IQR: 30-57.5] vs 33 [IQR: 25-43], female: 26.42% vs. 13.96%, p < 0.001 for both). As for documentation of significant IFs, only 49 of 112 chest IFs (43.8%) and 55 of 176 abdominopelvic IFs (31.3%) were documented. Investigating factors associated with documentation of clinically significant IFs, shorter length of hospital stay (1.5 (IQR: 0-4) vs. 3 (IQR: 2-8), p = 0.003), and discharging by ED physicians (documentation rate: 13.2% vs 42.6%, p < 0.001) were associated with poorer documentation of IFs only in abdominopelvic scans.

CONCLUSION

CT imaging in ED trauma patients often reveals incidental findings, especially in older patients. Over 50% of these findings are clinically significant, yet they are frequently ignored and not documented. Physicians need to be more vigilant in recognizing and documenting these incidental findings and informing patients of the need for further evaluation.

Comparison of natural language processing algorithms in assessing the importance of head computed tomography reports written in Japanese

PURPOSE

To propose a five-point scale for radiology report importance called Report Importance Category (RIC) and to compare the performance of natural language processing (NLP) algorithms in assessing RIC using head computed tomography (CT) reports written in Japanese.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3728 Japanese head CT reports performed at Osaka University Hospital in 2020 were included. RIC (category 0: no findings, category 1: minor findings, category 2: routine follow-up, category 3: careful follow-up, and category 4: examination or therapy) was established based not only on patient severity but also on the novelty of the information. The manual assessment of RIC for the reports was performed under the consensus of two out of four neuroradiologists. The performance of four NLP models for classifying RIC was compared using fivefold cross-validation: logistic regression, bidirectional long-short-term memory (BiLSTM), general bidirectional encoder representations of transformers (general BERT), and domain-specific BERT (BERT for medical domain).

RESULTS

The proportion of each RIC in the whole data set was 15.0%, 26.7%, 44.2%, 7.7%, and 6.4%, respectively. Domain-specific BERT showed the highest accuracy (0.8434 ± 0.0063) in assessing RIC and significantly higher AUC in categories 1 (0.9813 ± 0.0011), 2 (0.9492 ± 0.0045), 3 (0.9637 ± 0.0050), and 4 (0.9548 ± 0.0074) than the other models (p < .05). Analysis using layer-integrated gradients showed that the domain-specific BERT model could detect important words, such as disease names in reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Domain-specific BERT has superiority over the other models in assessing our newly proposed criteria called RIC of head CT radiology reports. The accumulation of similar and further studies of has a potential to contribute to medical safety by preventing missed important findings by clinicians.

Expecting the unexpected: incidental findings at a level 1 trauma center

INTRODUCTION

Incidental findings on comprehensive imaging in the adult trauma population occur at rates as high as 54.8%. We sought to determine the incidence of potentially malignant or pre-malignant incidental findings in a high-volume level 1 trauma center and to evaluate follow-up recommendations.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of all patients with incidental findings on imaging who were admitted to the trauma service at our level 1 trauma center between January 1st, 2014, and October 1st, 2019. A multi-disciplinary team characterized findings as potentially malignant or pre-malignant.

RESULTS

The study included 495 patients who had incidental findings, 410 of whom had potentially malignant or pre-malignant findings on imaging, resulting in a cumulative incidence of 6.6%. The mean age was 65 and 217 (52.9%) patients were male. The majority of "incidentalomas" were discovered on CT imaging (n=665, 98.1%); over half were solid (n=349, 51.5%), while 27.4% were cystic (n=186) in nature. The lungs (n=199, 29.4%), kidneys (n=154, 22.8%), liver (n=74, 10.9%), thyroid gland (n=58, 8.6%), and adrenal glands (n=53, 7.8%) harbored the most incidentalomas. Less than half of patients with incidental findings received specific follow-up recommendations on the radiologist's report (n=150, 39%). Sixty-one percent of patients (n=250) had their incidentalomas detailed in the discharge paperwork.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study suggest that potentially malignant or pre-malignant incidental findings are common among trauma patients. Specific follow-up recommendations were not presented in 61% of the radiology reports, highlighting the need to standardize medical record capture of an incidentaloma to ensure adequate and appropriate follow-up.

Routine whole-body CT identifies clinically significant findings in patients supported with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

AIM

To determine the yield of routine whole-body computed tomography (CT) following extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) initiation and to assess the association of these findings with prognosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and ninety-eight consecutive patients with acute respiratory failure admitted for ECMO support between January 2015 and December 2019 who underwent whole-body CT performed within 48 h of ECMO initiation were examined in this single-institution retrospective study. CT findings were divided into three categories: clinically significant findings that may affect immediate management strategy or short-term outcomes; findings not related to hospital stay or outcome but require further workup; and benign findings that do not require further investigation. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the association of CT findings with 7- and 30-day survival.

RESULTS

Clinically significant findings were present in 147 (74%) patients, findings requiring further workup were found in 82 (41%) patients, and benign findings were identified in 180 (90%) of the patients. Patients with clinically significant neurological findings had an elevated risk of death at 7 days (odds ratio [OR] 3.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29; 9.93; p=0.01), but not 30 days. Increasing numbers of clinically significant findings were associated with greater odds of mortality at 7 days (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.08; 2.67; p=0.02) and 30 days (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.02; 1.96; p=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Imaging patients at the point of admission for VV-ECMO with CT frequently identified clinically significant abnormalities with prognostic implications of these. These findings provide support for the use of more routine CT at the point of treatment escalation with prospective studies now required.

Incidental Findings on Computerized Tomography Images of Trauma Cases

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics of incidental findings (IFs) on computed tomography (CT) scans of trauma admissions, examine associations between IFs and gender and age-groups, and discuss the management strategies.

METHODS

The CT reports were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate IFs. Cases were divided into five age-groups (0-19, 20- 39, 40-59, 60-79,≥80). IFs were classified as "Group 1": congenital anomalies that do not require further investigation, non-degenerative/minor degenerative findings; "Group 2": findings that do not require immediate intervention, require outpatient follow-up/in case of symptoms; and "Group 3": findings that require immediate intervention/further investigation.

RESULTS

There were 2385 CT scans and 1802 incidental findings (IFs) in 783 trauma cases. CT scans with IFs constituted 50.2%. The percentage of IFs was 75.6% in males and 24.4% in females, and they occurred in 4.8%, 27.6%, 44.3%, 20.9%, and 2.4% of age groups 1 to 5, respectively. Group 1 had 34.6%, group 2 had 54.6%, and group 3 had 10.8% IFs. There was not any significant association between the classification and gender or age-groups. In terms of organs, IFs of the thyroid and gall bladder & bile ducts were significantly higher among females (P=0.044 and P<0.001, respectively), while IFs in the head & neck region were significantly higher in males (P<0.001). Incidental findings in the kidney, liver, adrenal gland, and vascular structures differed significantly across age-groups (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

There were no significant relationships between the classification of IFs and gender or age-groups. However, the distribution of IFs was significantly associated with gender and age-groups in terms of organs. Healthcare professionals should consider this relationship when following up and treating patients.

Catching Those Who Fall Through the Cracks: Integrating a Follow-Up Process for Emergency Department Patients with Incidental Radiologic Findings

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Abnormal findings unrelated to the indication for testing are identified on emergency department (ED) imaging studies. We report the design and implementation of an electronic health record-based interdisciplinary referral system and our experience from the first 13 months of ensuring that patients with incidental radiology findings were connected with the appropriate outpatient surveillance.

METHODS

Our informatics team standardized the contemporaneous reporting of critical radiology alerts using our ED trackboard and created a companion follow-up request form for the treating ED clinicians to complete. The forms were routed to nurse case managers, who arranged follow-ups based on the findings and clinical significance. The primary outcome was the proportion of ED patient visits with identified incidental findings that had documented communication of the incidental findings and surveillance plans.

RESULTS

Over the first 13 months after implementation, 932 ED patient visits had critical radiology alert referrals, for a total of 982 incidental findings. The primary outcome (confirmed post-ED communication and documented follow-up plan) was attained in 888 (95.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 93.9% to 96.6%) ED patient visits with confirmed post-ED communication and documented follow-up plans. The team was unable to contact or confirm follow-up with 44 (4.7%, 95% CI 3.4 to 6.1) patients by telephone or through the health care system's electronic communication tools.

CONCLUSION

We report the implementation of a standardized notification and referral system for ED patients with incidental radiology findings. The development of a reliable notification and follow-up system is an important patient safety intervention given the opportunity to potentially identify undiagnosed malignancies.

Incidental Radiology Findings on Computed Tomography Studies in Emergency Department Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

An incidental finding is defined as a newly discovered mass or lesion detected on imaging performed for an unrelated reason. The identification of an incidental finding may be an opportunity for the early detection of a serious medical condition, including a malignancy. However, little is known about the prevalence of incidental findings in the emergency department (ED) setting and the strategies that can be used to mitigate the risk associated with them in the ED. This study aimed to estimate the overall prevalence of incidental findings and to summarize the currently described measures to mitigate the risks associated with incidental findings.

METHODS

On November 22, 2020, a systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus was performed for studies that were published in peer-reviewed journals and reported the prevalence of incidental findings in computed tomography (CT) scans in patients in the ED. Patients who received CT scans that included the head, neck, chest, or abdomen/pelvis were included. The study characteristics, overall prevalence of incidental findings, prevalence of incidental findings by body region, and prespecified subgroups were extracted. The criteria used for risk stratification within individual studies were also extracted. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1,385 studies were identified, and 69 studies met the inclusion criteria. The included studies represented 147,763 ED encounters or radiology reports across 16 countries, and 83% of studies were observational, cross-sectional studies. A total of 35 studies (50.7%) were in trauma patients. A large degree of heterogeneity was observed across the included studies. The overall pooled prevalence estimate for any incidental finding was 31.3% (95% confidence interval 24.4% to 39.1%). We found great variation in the methods described to mitigate the risk associated with incidental findings, including a lack of standardized risk stratification, inconsistent documentation practices, and only a small subset of studies describing prospective interventions aimed at improving the recognition and management of incidental findings from the ED.

CONCLUSION

In patients in the ED receiving CT scans, incidental findings are commonly encountered across a broad range of ED chief complaints. This review highlights the existence of great heterogeneity in the definitions used to classify incidental findings. Future studies are needed to determine a clinically feasible categorization standard or terminology for commonly encountered incidental findings in the ED setting to standardize classification and documentation.

Incidental CT Findings in the Elderly with Low-Energy Falls: Prevalence and Implications

Background: Computed tomography (CT) is commonly used in trauma care, with increasing implementation during the emergency work-up of elderly patients with low-energy falls (LEF). The prevalence of incidental findings (IFs) resulting from CT imaging and requiring down-stream actions in this patient cohort is unknown. We have investigated the prevalence and urgency of IFs from emergency CT examinations in these patients. Methods: A total of 2871 patients with LEF and emergency CT examinations were consecutively included in this retrospective cohort study. The primary endpoint was the prevalence of IFs; the secondary endpoint was their urgency. Results: The median age was 82 years (64.2% were women). IFs were identified in 73.9% of patients, with an average of 1.6 IFs per patient. Of all IFs, 16.4% were classified as urgent or relevant, predominantly in the abdomen, chest and neck. Increasing age was associated with the prevalence of an IF (odds ratio: 1.053, 95% confidence interval: 1.042–1.064). Significantly more IFs were found in female patients (75.2% vs. 71.5%). Conclusion: IFs resulting from CT examinations of the elderly are frequent, but in more than 8 out of 10, they are harmless or currently asymptomatic. For the benefit of an accurate diagnosis of traumatic lesions, concerns about IFs with respect to disease burden, further work-up and resource utilisation might be disregarded.

Should We Report Incidental Low-Density Liver Lesions with Benign Features? A Retrospective Single-Center Analysis of Trauma CT Scans

Background Many incidental liver lesions are benign and require no additional workup. Investigation of such lesions can have a negative impact of both the patient and health care system. However, the impact of how radiologists report these incidental lesions is not clear. We aimed to investigate how reporting of incidental liver lesions on trauma computed tomography (CT) scan affects follow-up.

Methods This is a retrospective single-center analysis of body CT scans performed following abdominal trauma. Information was collected on the reporting of incidental low-density liver lesions and any additional imaging performed.

Results A total of 3,595 trauma body CT scan reports were reviewed. Incidental liver lesions were identified in 527 (15%) patients, with 347 (10%) fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Additional imaging was requested by the referring doctor for 43 out of 285 patients (15%) when lesions were mentioned in the body of the report only, compared with 41 out of 62 patients (66%) when mentioned in the conclusion (odds ratio [OR] = 10.99, p < 0.0001). When additional imaging was recommended in the report, follow-up was arranged for 36 out of 52 patients (69%), compared with 48 out of 285 patients (16%) when it was not suggested (OR = 11.58, p < 0.0001). Additional imaging was requested for 84 of the 347 patients (24%), with 24 of these performed at our institution. All patients followed-up at our institution were diagnosed with a benign lesion.

Conclusion Reporting incidental hypodense liver lesions in the conclusion or specifically recommending further additional imaging, both led to significantly increased likelihood of additional imaging being performed. Radiologists who encounter such lesions should consider excluding them from the conclusion if there are no malignant features or patient risk factors.

Emergent Comprehensive Imaging of the Major Trauma Patient: A New Paradigm for Improved Clinical Decision-Making

Modern advances in the medical imaging layered onto sophisticated trauma resuscitation strategies in highly organized regionalized trauma systems have created a paradigm shift in the management of severely injured patients. Although immediate exploratory surgery to identify and control life-threatening injuries still has its place, accelerated image acquisition and interpretation procedures now make it rare for trauma surgeons in major centers to venture into damage control surgery unaided by computed tomography (CT) or other imaging, particularly in cases of blunt trauma. Indeed, because of the high incidence of clinically occult injuries associated with major mechanism trauma, and even lower energy trauma in frail or elderly patients, CT imaging has become as invaluable as physical examination, if not more so, in critical decision-making in support of optimal outcomes. In particular, whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) completed promptly after initial assessment of a major trauma provides a quick, comprehensive survey of injuries that enables better surgical planning, obviates the need for multiple subsequent studies, and permits specialized reconstructions when needed. For those at risk for problematic occult injury after modest trauma, WBCT facilitates safer discharge planning and simplified follow-up. Through standardized guidelines, streamlined protocols, synoptic reporting, accessible web-based platforms, and active collaboration with clinicians, radiologists dedicated to trauma and emergency imaging enable clearer understanding of complex injuries in high-risk patients which leads to superior clinical decision-making. Whereas dated dogma has long warned that the CT scanner is the last place to take a challenging trauma patient, modern practice suggests that, more often than not, early comprehensive imaging can be done safely and efficiently and is in the patient's best interest. This article outlines how the role of diagnostic imaging for major trauma has evolved considerably in recent years.