Whole-Body MRI Screening in Asymptomatic Subjects; Preliminary Experience and Long-Term Follow-Up Findings

Ulus, Sıla; Süleyman, Erdoğan; Özcan, Ümit Aksoy; Karaarslan, Ercan

doi:10.12659/pjr.897570

Cited by 23 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 30 publications

(36 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After reviewing the full text, five studies were excluded because data were also used in another article from the same group, comprising a larger number of patients; one study was excluded because it only reported study rationale and design, and one study was excluded because it was not clear whether the head and neck region was included in the FOV . Eventually, 12 studies were included in this systematic review, published between 2005 and 2018 . Screening the reference lists of these articles did not result in other potentially relevant studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pooled proportion of reported verified critical and indeterminate incidental findings was 12.6% (95% CI: 3.2%, 38.8%). False‐positives findings were reported by six studies, with a pooled proportion of 16.0% (95% CI: 1.9%, 65.8%). None of the included studies reported long‐term (>5 year) verification of negative findings.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…None of the included studies reported long‐term (>5 year) verification of negative findings. Only one study performed 3–5‐year follow‐up for the majority (64%) of included subjects, by reviewing any performed radiological work‐up, medical records, and/or telephone interviews: reported proportion of false‐negative findings was 2.0% …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of different MRI protocols leads to different sensitivity and specificity, and this was probably the main cause of between‐study heterogeneity. For example, in one study a coccygeal chordoma was probably not detected because no sequence in the sagittal plane was acquired . In another study, lung carcinoma was only detected on diffusion‐weighted imaging .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In another study, lung carcinoma was only detected on diffusion‐weighted imaging . In yet another study, gadolinium‐enhanced sequences were used in 12 subjects for lesion characterization, which increases specificity (and decreases false‐positive findings). Because there was a large variation in MRI protocols used by the included studies, we could not explore the effect of relevant parameters (such as the use of different imaging planes and sequences) on the prevalence of whole‐body MRI findings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Whole‐body MRI for preventive health screening: A systematic review of the literature

Kwee

2019

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe yield of whole‐body MRI for preventive health screening is currently not completely clear.PurposeTo systematically review the prevalence of whole‐body MRI findings in asymptomatic subjects.Study TypeSystematic review and meta‐analysis.SubjectsMEDLINE and Embase were searched for original studies reporting whole‐body MRI findings in asymptomatic adults without known disease, syndrome, or genetic mutation. Twelve studies, comprising 5373 asymptomatic subjects, were included.Field Strength/Sequence1.5T or 3.0T, whole‐body MRI.AssessmentThe whole‐body MRI literature findings were extracted and reviewed by two radiologists in consensus for designation as either critical or indeterminate incidental finding.Statistical TestsData were pooled using a random effects model on the assumption that most subjects had ≤1 critical or indeterminate incidental finding. Heterogeneity was assessed by the I 2 statistic.ResultsPooled prevalences of critical and indeterminate incidental findings together and separately were 32.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.3%, 50.1%), 13.4% (95% CI: 9.0%, 19.5%), and 13.9% (95% CI: 5.4%, 31.3%), respectively. There was substantial between‐study heterogeneity (I 2 = 95.6–99.1). Pooled prevalence of critical and indeterminate incidental findings together was significantly higher in studies that included (cardio)vascular and/or colon MRI compared with studies that did not (49.7% [95% CI, 26.7%, 72.9%] vs. 23.0% [95% CI, 5.5%, 60.3%], P < 0.001). Pooled proportion of reported verified critical and indeterminate incidental findings was 12.6% (95% CI: 3.2%, 38.8%). Six studies reported false‐positive findings, yielding a pooled proportion of 16.0% (95% CI: 1.9%, 65.8%). None of the included studies reported long‐term (>5‐year) verification of negative findings. Only one study reported false‐negative findings, with a proportion of 2.0%.Data ConclusionPrevalence of critical and indeterminate incidental whole‐body MRI findings in asymptomatic subjects is overall substantial and with variability dependent to some degree on the protocol. Verification data are lacking. The proportion of false‐positive findings appears to be substantial. Level of Evidence: 4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:1489–1503.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Whole‐body MRI for preventive health screening: A systematic review of the literature

Kwee

2019

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in children – how and why? A systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly being used for a number of indications. Our aim was to review and describe indications and scan protocols for diagnostic value of whole-body MRI for multifocal disease in children and adolescents, we conducted a systematic search in Medline, Embase and Cochrane for all published papers until November 2018. Relevant subject headings and free text words were used for the following concepts: 1) whole-body, 2) magnetic resonance imaging and 3) child and/or adolescent. Included were papers in English with a relevant study design that reported on the use and/ or findings from whole-body MRI examinations in children and adolescents. This review includes 54 of 1,609 papers identified from literature searches. Chronic nonbacterial osteomyelitis, lymphoma and metastasis were the most frequent indications for performing a whole-body MRI. The typical protocol included a coronal STIR (short tau inversion recovery) sequence with or without a coronal T1-weighted sequence. Numerous studies lacked sufficient data for calculating images resolution and only a few studies reported the acquired voxel volume, making it impossible for others to reproduce the protocol/images. Only a minority of the included papers assessed reliability tests and none of the studies documented whether the use of whole-body MRI affected mortality and/or morbidity. Our systematic review confirms significant variability of technique and the lack of proven validity of MRI findings. The information could potentially be used to boost attempts towards standardization of technique, reporting and guidelines development.

show abstract

The role of radiological and hybrid imaging for muscle metastases: a systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whole-Body MRI Screening in Asymptomatic Subjects; Preliminary Experience and Long-Term Follow-Up Findings

Cited by 23 publications

References 30 publications

Whole‐body MRI for preventive health screening: A systematic review of the literature

Whole‐body MRI for preventive health screening: A systematic review of the literature

Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in children – how and why? A systematic review

The role of radiological and hybrid imaging for muscle metastases: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About