Abstract

To assess extraspinal findings (ESFs) prevalence in lumbar spine MRI, including clinically significant findings using a systematic approach, and to determine their reporting rate. Lumbar spine MRI scans were retrospectively reviewed over 18 months by two radiologists. Reading discrepancies were resolved by consensus. ESFs were classified according to the involved system, clinical diagnosis, and clinical significance. The reporting rate was estimated by referring to the original report. There were 1509 ESFs in 1322/4250 patients with a substantial agreement between the two radiologists (kappa = 0.8). Almost half (621/1322) were in the 45–60 age group. Females represented 56.6% (748/1322). 74.2% (1120/1509) of the ESFs involved the urinary system among which 79.6% (892/1120) were renal cysts. Clinically significant findings represented 8.7% (131/1509) among which hydronephrosis represented 23% (30/131). First time detected malignant lesions represented 4.6% (6/131). ESFs reporting rate was 47.3%. 58.8% of the clinically significant ESFs were not reported. ESFs prevalence was 31.1%. The Urinary system was the most commonly involved. Most ESFs were benign warranting no further workup. However, clinically significant ESF were not infrequently detected. More than half of the clinically significant findings were not reported. A systematic review of MRI images is highly recommended to improve patient’s outcome.

Highlights

  • To assess extraspinal findings (ESFs) prevalence in lumbar spine MRI, including clinically significant findings using a systematic approach, and to determine their reporting rate

  • ESFs were detected in 31.1% (1322/4250) of the patients

  • There was a substantial agreement in the identification of the ESFs between the two radiologists (Kappa = 0.8, 95% Confidence interval = − 0.42 to 1.18), P-value < 0.005)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

To assess extraspinal findings (ESFs) prevalence in lumbar spine MRI, including clinically significant findings using a systematic approach, and to determine their reporting rate. More than half of the clinically significant findings were not reported. Lumbar MRI scans are commonly encountered in radiologists’ daily practice. These scans are primarily protocolled for the evaluation of the spinal column and its contents. On the other hand, underreporting of ESFs, especially those of clinical significance can adversely affect subsequent patient management. It can raise ethical and legal concerns for the reading r­ adiologists[3,5,6]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call