H Gilbert Welch1,2,3, Jonathan S Skinner1,4, Florian R Schroeck1,3,5,6, Weiping Zhou1, William C Black1,7. 1. Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire. 2. Department of Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire. 3. Veterans Affairs Outcomes Group, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont. 4. Department of Economics, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire. 5. Department of Surgery, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire. 6. Urology Service, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont. 7. Department of Radiology, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire.
Abstract
Importance: While computed tomography (CT) represents a tremendous advance in diagnostic imaging, it also creates the problem of incidental detection-the identification of tumors unrelated to the clinical symptoms that initiate the test. Objective: To determine the geographic variation in the United States in CT imaging and the corresponding association with one of the most consequential sequelae of incidental detection: nephrectomy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a cross-sectional analysis of age-, sex-, and race-adjusted Medicare data (January 2010-December 2014) from 306 hospital referral regions (HRRs) in the United States and includes information from 15 million fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries age 65 to 85 years. Exposures: Regional CT risk (ie, the proportion of the population receiving either a chest or abdominal CT over 5 years). Main Outcomes and Measures: Five-year risk of nephrectomy (partial or total). Results: Data from 15 million fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries age 65 to 85 years were gathered and illustrate that 43% of Medicare beneficiaries age 65 to 85 years received either a chest or abdominal CT from January 2010 to December 2014. This risk varied across the HRRs, ranging from 31% in Santa Cruz, California, to 52% in Sun City, Arizona. Increased regional CT risk was associated with a higher nephrectomy risk (r = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.28-0.47), particularly among HRRs with more than 50 000 beneficiaries (r = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31-0.61). After controlling for HRR adult smoking rates, imaging an additional 1000 beneficiaries was associated with 4 additional nephrectomies (95% CI, 3-5). Case-fatality rates for those who underwent nephrectomy were 2.1% at 30 days and 4.3% at 90 days. Conclusions and Relevance: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries are commonly exposed to CT imaging. Those residing in high-scanning regions face a higher risk of nephrectomy, presumably reflecting the incidental detection of renal masses. Additional surgery should be considered one of the risks of excessive CT imaging.
Importance: While computed tomography (CT) represents a tremendous advance in diagnostic imaging, it also creates the problem of incidental detection-the identification of tumors unrelated to the clinical symptoms that initiate the test. Objective: To determine the geographic variation in the United States in CT imaging and the corresponding association with one of the most consequential sequelae of incidental detection: nephrectomy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a cross-sectional analysis of age-, sex-, and race-adjusted Medicare data (January 2010-December 2014) from 306 hospital referral regions (HRRs) in the United States and includes information from 15 million fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries age 65 to 85 years. Exposures: Regional CT risk (ie, the proportion of the population receiving either a chest or abdominal CT over 5 years). Main Outcomes and Measures: Five-year risk of nephrectomy (partial or total). Results: Data from 15 million fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries age 65 to 85 years were gathered and illustrate that 43% of Medicare beneficiaries age 65 to 85 years received either a chest or abdominal CT from January 2010 to December 2014. This risk varied across the HRRs, ranging from 31% in Santa Cruz, California, to 52% in Sun City, Arizona. Increased regional CT risk was associated with a higher nephrectomy risk (r = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.28-0.47), particularly among HRRs with more than 50 000 beneficiaries (r = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31-0.61). After controlling for HRR adult smoking rates, imaging an additional 1000 beneficiaries was associated with 4 additional nephrectomies (95% CI, 3-5). Case-fatality rates for those who underwent nephrectomy were 2.1% at 30 days and 4.3% at 90 days. Conclusions and Relevance: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries are commonly exposed to CT imaging. Those residing in high-scanning regions face a higher risk of nephrectomy, presumably reflecting the incidental detection of renal masses. Additional surgery should be considered one of the risks of excessive CT imaging.
Authors: William R Hendee; Gary J Becker; James P Borgstede; Jennifer Bosma; William J Casarella; Beth A Erickson; C Douglas Maynard; James H Thrall; Paul E Wallner Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-08-24 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Lincoln L Berland; Stuart G Silverman; Richard M Gore; William W Mayo-Smith; Alec J Megibow; Judy Yee; James A Brink; Mark E Baker; Michael P Federle; W Dennis Foley; Isaac R Francis; Brian R Herts; Gary M Israel; Glenn Krinsky; Joel F Platt; William P Shuman; Andrew J Taylor Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Borje Ljungberg; Karim Bensalah; Steven Canfield; Saeed Dabestani; Fabian Hofmann; Milan Hora; Markus A Kuczyk; Thomas Lam; Lorenzo Marconi; Axel S Merseburger; Peter Mulders; Thomas Powles; Michael Staehler; Alessandro Volpe; Axel Bex Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Anas M Saad; Mohamed M Gad; Muneer J Al-Husseini; Inas A Ruhban; Mohamad Bassam Sonbol; Thai H Ho Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2018-10-11 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Harminder Singh; James A Dickinson; Guylène Thériault; Roland Grad; Stéphane Groulx; Brenda J Wilson; Olga Szafran; Neil R Bell Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Harminder Singh; James A Dickinson; Guylène Thériault; Roland Grad; Stéphane Groulx; Brenda J Wilson; Olga Szafran; Neil R Bell Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Matthew S Davenport; Hersh Chandarana; Nicole E Curci; Ankur Doshi; Samuel D Kaffenberger; Ivan Pedrosa; Erick M Remer; Nicola Schieda; Atul B Shinagare; Andrew D Smith; Zhen J Wang; Shane A Wells; Stuart G Silverman Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2018-09
Authors: Stuart G Silverman; Ivan Pedrosa; James H Ellis; Nicole M Hindman; Nicola Schieda; Andrew D Smith; Erick M Remer; Atul B Shinagare; Nicole E Curci; Steven S Raman; Shane A Wells; Samuel D Kaffenberger; Zhen J Wang; Hersh Chandarana; Matthew S Davenport Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-06-18 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ghislaine Scelo; David C Muller; Elio Riboli; Mattias Johansson; Amanda J Cross; Paolo Vineis; Konstantinos K Tsilidis; Paul Brennan; Heiner Boeing; Petra H M Peeters; Roel C H Vermeulen; Kim Overvad; H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita; Gianluca Severi; Vittorio Perduca; Marina Kvaskoff; Antonia Trichopoulou; Carlo La Vecchia; Anna Karakatsani; Domenico Palli; Sabina Sieri; Salvatore Panico; Elisabete Weiderpass; Torkjel M Sandanger; Therese H Nøst; Antonio Agudo; J Ramón Quirós; Miguel Rodríguez-Barranco; Maria-Dolores Chirlaque; Timothy J Key; Prateek Khanna; Joseph V Bonventre; Venkata S Sabbisetti; Rupal S Bhatt Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2018-07-23 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Shuyu Tang; Maxwell V Meng; James B Slater; Jeremy W Gordon; Daniel B Vigneron; Bradley A Stohr; Peder E Z Larson; Zhen Jane Wang Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 6.860