Sakthivel Gnanasambandam1, Øystein Erlend Olsen. 1. Radiology Department, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, Great Ormond Street, London, WC1N 3JH, UK. olseno@gosh.nhs.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that the pelvis should not be habitually included on abdominal CT examinations, but the potential benefit of such a practice in childhood abdominal malignancies is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the yield and potential diagnostic benefit of abnormal findings on CT of the pelvis in children with malignant primary tumours in the upper abdomen. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a paediatric tertiary referral hospital we retrospectively included patients having abdominal CT for primary upper abdominal tumours (1997-2004), the scan range routinely including the pelvis. We reviewed and tabulated any pelvic abnormality, and calculated group proportions with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: We identified 230 children (2 days to 17 years old, median 2.9 years). Six (2.6%; 95% CI 0.5-4.7%) had abnormalities in the pelvis that would not have affected clinical management. Four (1.7%; 95% CI 0.1-3.4%) had findings that might have influenced staging, but only one was not detected by other modalities within 1 week of the CT. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that diagnostically significant findings in the pelvis are rare; consequently, the habitual inclusion of the pelvis on abdominal CT for primary malignant tumours in the abdomen is not justified.
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that the pelvis should not be habitually included on abdominal CT examinations, but the potential benefit of such a practice in childhood abdominal malignancies is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the yield and potential diagnostic benefit of abnormal findings on CT of the pelvis in children with malignant primary tumours in the upper abdomen. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a paediatric tertiary referral hospital we retrospectively included patients having abdominal CT for primary upper abdominal tumours (1997-2004), the scan range routinely including the pelvis. We reviewed and tabulated any pelvic abnormality, and calculated group proportions with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: We identified 230 children (2 days to 17 years old, median 2.9 years). Six (2.6%; 95% CI 0.5-4.7%) had abnormalities in the pelvis that would not have affected clinical management. Four (1.7%; 95% CI 0.1-3.4%) had findings that might have influenced staging, but only one was not detected by other modalities within 1 week of the CT. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that diagnostically significant findings in the pelvis are rare; consequently, the habitual inclusion of the pelvis on abdominal CT for primary malignant tumours in the abdomen is not justified.