ArticleThe British journal of radiology2025
Incidental findings associated with MRI of the hand and wrist.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo identify the prevalence of incidentalomas and incidental findings in symptomatic patients undergoing MRI of the hand or wrist.
methodsThis retrospective cross-sectional study included all children and adults who completed MRI of the hand or wrist over a 14-year period in a single UK tertiary centre. An incidental finding was any abnormality (structural or signal-based), suspected injury or disease-process that was not already established or suspected. Incidentalomas were defined as incidental findings requiring further investigation or treatment. Marginal standardisation was used to explore relationships between prognostic factors and outcomes.
resultsOverall, 490 out of 2138 (22.9%) scans contained 1 or more incidental anomalies and 67 (3.1%) had at least 1 incidentaloma. The risk of incidentalomas doubled (risk ratio (RR), 1.93; 95% CI, 1.01 to 3.70) when reported by a trainee and reviewed by a consultant compared to a consultant alone; increased by 12% (RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.28) per additional decade of life; and were less likely (RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.94) when contrast was used. Three incidentalomas were found to be malignant (3.3%).
conclusionsThe risk of incidentalomas and incidental findings in MRI of the hand and wrist is lower than solid organs. Our data may be used to inform patients about the risks of imaging and allow health services to plan the capacity and capability to deal with such events. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: One in 4 hand or wrist MRIs yields an incidental finding and out of these, around 1 in 7 required further action.
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.