English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Purpose Development of best practices for dealing with incidental findings on neuroimaging requires insight in their frequency and clinical relevance. Methods Here, we delineate prevalence estimates with 95% confidence intervals and clinical management of incidental findings, based on the first 3589 participants of the population-based Rhineland Study (age range 30–95 years) who underwent 3 Tesla structural neuroimaging (3D, 0.8 mm 3  isotropic resolution). Two trained raters independently assessed all scans for abnormalities, with confirmation and adjudication where needed by neuroradiologists. Participants were referred for diagnostic work-up depending on the potential benefit. Results Of 3589 participants (mean age 55 ± 14 years, 2072 women), 867 had at least one possible incidental finding (24.2%). Most common were pituitary abnormalities (12.3%), arachnoid cysts (4.1%), developmental venous anomalies (2.5%), non-acute infarcts (1.8%), cavernomas (1.0%), and meningiomas (0.7%). Forty-six participants were informed about their findings, which was hitherto unknown in 40 of them (1.1%). Of these, in 19 participants (48%), a wait-and-see policy was applied and nine (23%) received treatment, while lesions in the remainder were benign, could not be confirmed, or the participant refused to inform us about their clinical diagnosis. Conclusion Nearly one-quarter of participants had an incidental finding, but only 5% of those required referral, that mostly remained without direct clinical consequences.

Incidental findings on 3 T neuroimaging: cross-sectional observations from the population-based Rhineland Study