Surya N Gupta1, Brook Belay. 1. Section of Child Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19140, USA. guptasn@temple.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies have addressed the prevalence of incidental findings largely in healthy adult and pediatric populations. Our study aims to elucidate the prevalence of incidental findings in a pediatric neurology practice. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of 1618 patients seen at a pediatric neurology practice at a tertiary care center from September 2003 to December 2005 for clinical data and incidental intracranial findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging reports. Incidental findings were divided into two categories: normal or abnormal variants. Clinical and demographic data were assessed for associations with incidental findings. RESULTS: From 1618 charts reviewed, only 666 patients (41% of all patients) had brain MRIs ordered. One-hundred and seventy-one (171) patients (25.7% of all patients; 95% CI: 22.6, 29.0) had incidental findings. Of these, 113 (17.0%; 95% CI: 14.1, 19.8) were classified as normal-variants and 58 (8.7%; 95% CI: 6.6, 10.9) were classified as abnormal. The nature of incidental findings was not related to age group, sex or clinical diagnosis (p=0.29, p=0.31 and p=0.69 respectively). Two patients (0.3%; 95% CI: approximately 0.0, 0.7) required neurosurgical referral. CONCLUSIONS: We report a high prevalence of and a low rate of referrals for incidental findings in comparison to previous studies. The present study may help guide management decisions and discussions with patients and families. Future studies should attempt to address issues of associations between primary or secondary diagnoses and intracranial incidental findings in a controlled, prospective fashion.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies have addressed the prevalence of incidental findings largely in healthy adult and pediatric populations. Our study aims to elucidate the prevalence of incidental findings in a pediatric neurology practice. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of 1618 patients seen at a pediatric neurology practice at a tertiary care center from September 2003 to December 2005 for clinical data and incidental intracranial findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging reports. Incidental findings were divided into two categories: normal or abnormal variants. Clinical and demographic data were assessed for associations with incidental findings. RESULTS: From 1618 charts reviewed, only 666 patients (41% of all patients) had brain MRIs ordered. One-hundred and seventy-one (171) patients (25.7% of all patients; 95% CI: 22.6, 29.0) had incidental findings. Of these, 113 (17.0%; 95% CI: 14.1, 19.8) were classified as normal-variants and 58 (8.7%; 95% CI: 6.6, 10.9) were classified as abnormal. The nature of incidental findings was not related to age group, sex or clinical diagnosis (p=0.29, p=0.31 and p=0.69 respectively). Two patients (0.3%; 95% CI: approximately 0.0, 0.7) required neurosurgical referral. CONCLUSIONS: We report a high prevalence of and a low rate of referrals for incidental findings in comparison to previous studies. The present study may help guide management decisions and discussions with patients and families. Future studies should attempt to address issues of associations between primary or secondary diagnoses and intracranial incidental findings in a controlled, prospective fashion.
Authors: Mark D Shen; Christine W Nordahl; Gregory S Young; Sandra L Wootton-Gorges; Aaron Lee; Sarah E Liston; Kayla R Harrington; Sally Ozonoff; David G Amaral Journal: Brain Date: 2013-07-09 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: H Alexander; D Tsering; J S Myseros; S N Magge; C Oluigbo; C E Sanchez; Robert F Keating Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2019-07-27 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Amy-Lee Bredlau; Louis S Constine; Howard J Silberstein; Michael T Milano; David N Korones Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2011-08-19 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Adolf Pfefferbaum; Torsten Rohlfing; Kilian M Pohl; Barton Lane; Weiwei Chu; Dongjin Kwon; B Nolan Nichols; Sandra A Brown; Susan F Tapert; Kevin Cummins; Wesley K Thompson; Ty Brumback; M J Meloy; Terry L Jernigan; Anders Dale; Ian M Colrain; Fiona C Baker; Devin Prouty; Michael D De Bellis; James T Voyvodic; Duncan B Clark; Beatriz Luna; Tammy Chung; Bonnie J Nagel; Edith V Sullivan Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2015-09-26 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: Edith V Sullivan; Barton Lane; Dongjin Kwon; M J Meloy; Susan F Tapert; Sandra A Brown; Ian M Colrain; Fiona C Baker; Michael D De Bellis; Duncan B Clark; Bonnie J Nagel; Kilian M Pohl; Adolf Pfefferbaum Journal: Brain Imaging Behav Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 3.978
Authors: Wojciech Wiszniewski; Jill V Hunter; Neil A Hanchard; Jason R Willer; Chad Shaw; Qi Tian; Anna Illner; Xueqing Wang; Sau W Cheung; Ankita Patel; Ian M Campbell; Violet Gelowani; Patricia Hixson; Audrey R Ester; Mahshid S Azamian; Lorraine Potocki; Gladys Zapata; Patricia P Hernandez; Melissa B Ramocki; Regie L P Santos-Cortez; Gao Wang; Michele K York; Monica J Justice; Zili D Chu; Patricia I Bader; Lisa Omo-Griffith; Nirupama S Madduri; Gunter Scharer; Heather P Crawford; Pattamawadee Yanatatsaneejit; Anna Eifert; Jeffery Kerr; Carlos A Bacino; Adiaha I A Franklin; Robin P Goin-Kochel; Gayle Simpson; Ladonna Immken; Muhammad E Haque; Marija Stosic; Misti D Williams; Thomas M Morgan; Sumit Pruthi; Reed Omary; Simeon A Boyadjiev; Kay K Win; Aye Thida; Matthew Hurles; Martin Lloyd Hibberd; Chiea Chuen Khor; Nguyen Van Vinh Chau; Thomas E Gallagher; Apiwat Mutirangura; Pawel Stankiewicz; Arthur L Beaudet; Mirjana Maletic-Savatic; Jill A Rosenfeld; Lisa G Shaffer; Erica E Davis; John W Belmont; Sarah Dunstan; Cameron P Simmons; Penelope E Bonnen; Suzanne M Leal; Nicholas Katsanis; James R Lupski; Seema R Lalani Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2013-06-27 Impact factor: 11.025