Advertisement

Brain Imaging and Behavior

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 293–299 | Cite as

Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging in the elderly:the PROOF study

  • Claire Boutet
  • François Vassal
  • Sébastien Celle
  • Fabien C. Schneider
  • Jean-Claude Barthélémy
  • Bernard Laurent
  • Fabrice-Guy Barral
  • Frédéric Roche
Brief Communication

Abstract

To prospectively evaluate the prevalence of incidental findings on standardized brain MRI scans in a cohort of elderly subjects. All participants provided written informed consent to participate in this prospective study, which was approved by the institutional review board and was HIPAA compliant. There were 503 subjects (75.3 ± 0.9 years of age, 58 % women) who received brain MRIs on a 1.5-T scanner using a standard acquisition protocol. All scans were reviewed by an experienced neuroradiologist. Incidental findings were stratified as follows: 1, no incidental findings; 2, incidental findings without clinical significance; 3, incidental findings with clinical significance or requiring clinical follow-up. Incidental findings were identified in 77.9 % of subjects. Among 392 scans that exhibited incidental findings, 494 abnormalities were identified. The most common findings in our study were cysts (45.9 % of subjects) and ear, nose, and throat (ENT) lesions (24.8 %) followed by stroke lesions (6.6 %) and neoplasms (3.8 %). There were 472 incidental findings that lacked clinical significance (group 2), and 22 incidental findings that required follow-up evaluation (group 3). Incidental findings on brain MRIs were commonly observed in this cohort of elderly subjects, but clinical follow-up was rarely indicated.

Keywords

Brain Magnetic resonance imaging Incidental findings Elderly 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

This study was funded by a grant from the French Ministry of Health (Cellule Projet Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique National, Direction de la Recherche Clinique, CHU Saint-Etienne; Appel d’Offre 1998 and 2002) and by a grant from Association SYNAPSE.

Clinical Trial Registration: NCT 00759304; NCT00766584.

Conflict of Interest

Claire Boutet declares that she has no conflict of interest. François Vassal declares that he has no conflict of interest. Sébastien Celle declares that he has no conflict of interest. Fabien Schneider declares that he has no conflict of interest. Jean-Claude Barthélémy declares that he has no conflict of interest. Bernard Laurent declares that he has no conflict of interest. Fabrice-Guy Barral declares that he has no conflict of interest. Frédéric Roche declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Anderson, V. C., Obayashi, J. T., Kaye, J. A., Quinn, J. F., Berryhill, P., Riccelli, L. P., et al. (2014). Longitudinal relaxographic imaging of white matter hyperintensities in the elderly. Fluids Barriers CNS, 11, 24. doi: 10.1186/2045-8118-11-24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Assoumou, H. G., Bertholon, F., Barthélémy, J. C., Pichot, V., Celle, S., Gosse, P., et al. (2012). Alteration of baroreflex sensitivity in the elderly: the relationship with metabolic syndrome components. International Journal of Cardiology, 155(2), 333–335. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.12.050.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Barthélémy, J. C., Pichot, V., Dauphinot, V., Celle, S., Laurent, B., Garcin, A., et al. (2007). Autonomic nervous system activity and decline as prognostic indicators of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events: the ‘PROOF’ study. Study design and population sample. Associations with sleep-related breathing disorders: the ‘SYNAPSE’ study. Neuroepidemiology, 29(1–2), 18–28. doi: 10.1159/000108914.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Eskandary, H., Sabba, M., Khajehpour, F., & Eskandari, M. (2005). Incidental findings in brain computed tomography scans of 3000 head trauma patients. Surgical Neurology, 63(6), 550–553 discussion 553. doi: 10.1016/j.surneu.2004.07.049.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fazekas, F., Chawluk, J. B., Alavi, A., Hurtig, H. I., & Zimmerman, R. A. (1987). MR signal abnormalities at 1.5 T in Alzheimer’s dementia and normal aging. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, 149(2), 351–356. doi: 10.2214/ajr.149.2.351.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Gupta, S. N., & Belay, B. (2008). Intracranial incidental findings on brain MR images in a pediatric neurology practice: a retrospective study. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 264(1–2), 34–37. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2007.06.055.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Gur, R. E., Kaltman, D., Melhem, E. R., Ruparel, K., Prabhakaran, K., Riley, M., et al. (2013). Incidental findings in youths volunteering for brain MRI research. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 34(10), 2021–2025. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3525.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Illes, J. (2008). Brain screening and incidental findings: flocking to folly? Lancet Neurology, 7(1), 23–24. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(07)70308-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Illes, J., Desmond, J. E., Huang, L. F., Raffin, T. A., & Atlas, S. W. (2002). Ethical and practical considerations in managing incidental findings in functional magnetic resonance imaging. Brain and Cognition, 50(3), 358–365.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Illes, J., Rosen, A. C., Huang, L., Goldstein, R. A., Raffin, T. A., Swan, G., et al. (2004). Ethical consideration of incidental findings on adult brain MRI in research. Neurology, 62(6), 888–890.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Katzman, G. L., Dagher, A. P., & Patronas, N. J. (1999). Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging from 1000 asymptomatic volunteers. Jama, 282(1), 36–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kelly, M. E., Heeney, A., Redmond, C. E., Costelloe, J., Nason, G. J., Ryan, J., et al. (2015). Incidental findings detected on emergency abdominal CT scans: a 1-year review. Abdominal Imaging. doi: 10.1007/s00261-015-0349-4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim, B. S., Illes, J., Kaplan, R. T., Reiss, A., & Atlas, S. W. (2002). Incidental findings on pediatric MR images of the brain. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 23(10), 1674–1677.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Morris, Z., Whiteley, W. N., Longstreth, W. T., Weber, F., Lee, Y. C., Tsushima, Y., et al. (2009). Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 339, b3016.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation (2000). World health organ tech rep Ser, 894, i-xii, 1–253.Google Scholar
  16. Ogbole, G. I., Adeleye, A. O., Owolabi, M. O., Olatunji, R. B., & Yusuf, B. P. (2015). Incidental cranial CT findings in head injury patients in a Nigerian tertiary hospital. J Emerg Trauma Shock, 8(2), 77–82. doi: 10.4103/0974-2700.155499.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Ogbole, G. I., Owolabi, M. O., & Yusuf, B. P. (2013). White matter changes on magnetic resonance imaging: a risk factor for stroke in an African population? Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases, 22(7), e227–e233. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.01.003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Pickering, T. G., Hall, J. E., Appel, L. J., Falkner, B. E., Graves, J., Hill, M. N., et al. (2005). Recommendations for blood pressure measurement in humans and experimental animals: part 1: blood pressure measurement in humans: a statement for professionals from the subcommittee of professional and public education of the American heart association council on high blood pressure research. Hypertension, 45(1), 142–161. doi: 10.1161/01.HYP.0000150859.47929.8e.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Sandeman, E. M., Hernandez, M. E. C., Morris, Z., Bastin, M. E., Murray, C., Gow, A. J., et al. (2013). Incidental findings on brain MR imaging in older community-dwelling subjects are common but serious medical consequences are rare: a cohort study. PloS One, 8(8), e71467. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071467.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Thompson, R. J., Wojcik, S. M., Grant, W. D., & Ko, P. Y. (2011). Incidental findings on CT scans in the emergency department. Emerg Med Int, 2011, 624847. doi: 10.1155/2011/624847.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Vernooij, M. W., Ikram, M. A., Tanghe, H. L., Vincent, A. J., Hofman, A., Krestin, G. P., et al. (2007). Incidental findings on brain MRI in the general population. The New England Journal of Medicine, 357(18), 1821–1828. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa070972.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Yue, N. C., Longstreth Jr., W. T., Elster, A. D., Jungreis, C. A., O’Leary, D. H., & Poirier, V. C. (1997). Clinically serious abnormalities found incidentally at MR imaging of the brain: data from the cardiovascular health study. Radiology, 202(1), 41–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Inserm, U1059, University Lyon, CHU Saint-Etienne, Service de RadiologieSaint EtienneFrance
  2. 2.Neurosurgery, CHU Saint-EtienneSaint EtienneFrance
  3. 3.Clinical Physiology-VISAS Center, EA-4607-SNA-EPIS, CHU Saint-Etienne, COMUE-Lyon-St-EtienneSaint EtienneFrance
  4. 4.Neurology/Neuropsychology, CHU-Saint-EtienneSaint EtienneFrance

Personalised recommendations