Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Morris, Z., Whiteley, W. N., W T Longstreth, J., Weber, F., Lee, Y.-C., Tsushima, Y., Alphs, H., Ladd, S. C., Warlow, C., Wardlaw, J. M., & Salman, R. A.-S. (2009). Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 339
Abstract: Objective: To quantify the prevalence of incidental findings on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain. Design Systematic: review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Data sources: Ovid Medline (1950 to May 2008), Embase (1980 to May 2008), and bibliographies of relevant articles. Review methods: Two reviewers sought and assessed studies of people without neurological symptoms who underwent MRI of the brain with or without intravenous contrast for research purposes or for occupational, clinical, or commercial screening. Main outcome measures: Overall disease specific and age specific prevalence of incidental brain findings, calculated by meta-analysis of pooled proportions using DerSimonian-Laird weights in a random effects model. Results: In 16 studies, 135 of 19 559 people had neoplastic incidental brain findings (prevalence 0.70%, 95% confidence interval 0.47% to 0.98%), and prevalence increased with age (χ2 for linear trend, P=0.003). In 15 studies, 375 of 15 559 people had non-neoplastic incidental brain findings (prevalence 2.0%, 1.1% to 3.1%, excluding white matter hyperintensities, silent infarcts, and microbleeds). The number of asymptomatic people needed to scan to detect any incidental brain finding was 37. The prevalence of incidental brain findings was higher in studies using high resolution MRI sequences than in those using standard resolution sequences (4.3% v 1.7%, P<0.001). The prevalence of neoplastic incidental brain findings increased with age. Conclusions: Incidental findings on brain MRI are common, prevalence increases with age, and detection is more likely using high resolution MRI sequences than standard resolution sequences. These findings deserve to be mentioned when obtaining informed consent for brain MRI in research and clinical practice but are not sufficient to justify screening healthy asymptomatic people.