Hans J Meyer1, Johannes Uhlig2, Dominik Schramm1, Andreas G Bach1, Alexey Surov3. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Saale, Germany. 2. 2 Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany. 3. 3 Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Leipzig University Hospital, Leipzig, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the number of incidental findings on native CT treatment-planning scans for radiation in breast cancer patients. METHODS: The treatment-planning scans of 382 patients with non-metastatic breast cancer were retrospectively analyzed for additional findings. The planning scan area covered the entire thorax and the upper part of the abdomen. Incidental findings were classified according to their clinical relevance. RESULTS: Overall 892 incidental findings were detected in the CT treatment-planning scans (mean 2.34 findings per patient). Only a small proportion of patients (n = 63, 16.4%) had no finding. Most findings were located in the thorax (683, 76.57%), and 209 findings (23.43%) were abdominal. 79 findings (8.87%) were of major clinical relevance, 232 findings (26.01%) were of moderate clinical relevance and 580 findings (65.02%) were of minor clinical relevance. Most clinically relevant findings were in the thorax (p = 0.006). Abdominal findings were more of significantly minor clinical relevance (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Radiological findings are frequent in native CT treatment-planning scans for radiation of breast cancer patients. Therefore, the radiologist should use this performed sectional image to obtain additional information of the patient. Advances in knowledge: Treatment-planning CT scans can show several radiological findings, namely 2.34 findings per patient. Major clinically relevant findings account for 8.87%.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the number of incidental findings on native CT treatment-planning scans for radiation in breast cancerpatients. METHODS: The treatment-planning scans of 382 patients with non-metastatic breast cancer were retrospectively analyzed for additional findings. The planning scan area covered the entire thorax and the upper part of the abdomen. Incidental findings were classified according to their clinical relevance. RESULTS: Overall 892 incidental findings were detected in the CT treatment-planning scans (mean 2.34 findings per patient). Only a small proportion of patients (n = 63, 16.4%) had no finding. Most findings were located in the thorax (683, 76.57%), and 209 findings (23.43%) were abdominal. 79 findings (8.87%) were of major clinical relevance, 232 findings (26.01%) were of moderate clinical relevance and 580 findings (65.02%) were of minor clinical relevance. Most clinically relevant findings were in the thorax (p = 0.006). Abdominal findings were more of significantly minor clinical relevance (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Radiological findings are frequent in native CT treatment-planning scans for radiation of breast cancerpatients. Therefore, the radiologist should use this performed sectional image to obtain additional information of the patient. Advances in knowledge: Treatment-planning CT scans can show several radiological findings, namely 2.34 findings per patient. Major clinically relevant findings account for 8.87%.
Authors: L J Solin; J C Chu; M R Sontag; L Brewster; E Cheng; K Doppke; R E Drzymala; M Hunt; R Kuske; J M Manolis Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1991-05-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Claudia D Furtado; Diego A Aguirre; Claude B Sirlin; David Dang; Stephan K Stamato; Patrick Lee; Farhad Sani; Michelle A Brown; David L Levin; Giovanna Casola Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-09-16 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: G E Hanks; W R Lee; A L Hanlon; M Hunt; E Kaplan; B E Epstein; B Movsas; T E Schultheiss Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1996-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jan M Sohns; Wieland Staab; Jan Menke; Leonard Bergau; Darius Dabir; Alexander Schwarz; Judith E Spiro; Marc Dorenkamp; James L Harrison; Michael Steinmetz; Joachim Lotz; Christian Sohns Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-12-18 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: M J Zelefsky; S A Leibel; P B Gaudin; G J Kutcher; N E Fleshner; E S Venkatramen; V E Reuter; W R Fair; C C Ling; Z Fuks Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1998-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038