1. Home>
2. Reader Remarks

Reader Remarks on:

Investigation of Incidental Findings on Cardiac CT

• occult findings not incidentalomas

occult findings not incidentalomas

Jerry I. Meyers, 4 Jan 2010 6:34 PM EST

Competing interests: None declared

Even if one accepts the very conservative assessment that only 12 of the patients were found to have clinically significant conditions, that means that 3% of patients who had a cardiac CT performed had a condition that might have progressed with serious consequences if it had not been accidentally seen in the study.

The researchers do not see the benefit derived by the 3% as a bonus. They don’t question that all the patients benefited from having a cardiac CT. In fact, no one questions that this method of scanning provides an important and noninvasive method of evaluating patients suffering coronary calcification and arterial disease. However, in addition to the 12 with clinically significant findings, 68 patients exhibited incidental findings such as nodules or cysts in the lungs or liver.

Confronted with the 68 patients of the 401 who had abnormalities deemed to be indeterminate (undetermined significance) researchers worry that the abnormalities found might lead some to conduct further testing or evaluation. The solution, as they see it, is to not format the data concerning tissue outside of the lungs. They want to ask patients to consent to keeping the non-cardiac information invisible.

If this is a dilemma how is it different than reporting on "incidental findings" on other diagnostic imaging.

back to top

Your Remark: