ReviewCurrent treatment options in cardiovascular medicine2018
Incidental Non-cardiac Findings in Cardiovascular Imaging.
Review in Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the heart: a pictorial review of extracardiac findings on cardiac CT.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026Review
- Breast incidentaloma: Cardiac PET readers beware.Radiology case reports · 2025Article
- Shifting the Cancer Screening Paradigm: Developing a Multi-Biomarker Class Approach to Multi-Cancer Early Detection Testing.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Unexpected extracardiac findings in cardiac computed tomography from neonates to young adults.Pediatric radiology · 2023Review
- [German Radiological Society and the Professional Association of German Radiologists position paper on coronary computed tomography: clinical evidence and quality of patient care in chronic coronary syndrome].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Incidental chest findings on coronary CT angiography: a pictorial essay and management proposal.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Improvements in imaging techniques have led to an expansion in the number of cross-sectional cardiac studies being performed. This means that incidental non-cardiac findings (INCF) identified on cardiac imaging have become an important clinical concern. The majority of INCF are not clinically significant. However, some INCF will require follow-up or changes in management. Differentiating clinically significant from non-significant INCF can be challenging, particularly given the breadth of potential findings and the range of organ systems involved. Following up INCF also has economic implications. Recent changes to the lung nodule follow-up guidelines will reduce the cost of following up incidental lung nodules. In this manuscript, we discuss the common and important INCF which may be identified in cardiovascular imaging and explore potential implications of these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.