Sandoval BMA, García BMC, Sandoval OLI, Guillen SBA

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 198-202
PDF size: 165.42 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: incidental findings are occurring more frequently. In Mexico, their clinical, bioethical, and legal implications have not been discussed. Objective: to describe and discuss the clinical and bioethical implications of incidental findings in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Material and methods: this was an observational, retrospective, and cross-sectional study reviewing radiological records conducted at the Hospital Angeles Acoxpa from January 2 to May 3, 2020. Results: a total of 68 records were reviewed. The age ranged from 1 to 88 years, averaging 46 for women and 49 for men. We found that 39 cases (57%) represented an incidental finding, distributed as follows: category I, without clinical significance, we found it in 23 cases (59%), for example, vascular loops. Category II, reportable finding: we found it in 9 cases (23%), for example, Fazekas I-III. Category III, reportable finding, was found in seven cases (18%), e.g., subdural hematomas. Conclusion: we discuss the medical and bioethical implications of this problem and propose a methodology to follow. a) Incidental findings are frequent in our series; we found them in 57%. b) In 18%, they are life-threatening.

REFERENCES

1. Deng W, Faiq MA, Liu C, Adi V, Chan KC. Applications of manganese-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in ophthalmology and visual neuroscience. Front Neural Circuits. 2019; 13: 35.

2. Fu Y, Xiao Y, Du M, Mao C, Fu G, Yang L et al. Brain structural alterations in left-behind children: a magnetic resonance imaging study. Front Neural Circuits. 2019; 13: 33.

3. Raschke F, Barrick TR, Jones TL, Yang G, Ye X, Howe FA. Tissue-type mapping of gliomas. Neuroimage Clin. 2019; 21: 101648.

4. Tigano V, Cascini GL, Sanchez-Castañeda C, Péran P, Sabatini U. Neuroimaging and neurolaw: drawing the future of aging. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019; 10: 217.

5. Booth TC, Najim R, Petkova H. Incidental findings discovered during imaging: implications for general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 2016; 66 (648): 346-347.

6. Takashima K, Takimoto Y, Nakazawa E, Hayashi Y, Tsuchiya A, Fujita M et al. Discovery and informing research participants of incidental findings detected in brain magnetic resonance imaging studies: review and multi-institutional study. Brain and Behavior. 2017; 7 (5): e00676.

7. Shoemaker JM, Holdsworth MT, Aine C, Calhoun VD, de La Garza R, Feldstein Ewing SW et al. A practical approach to incidental findings in neuroimaging research. Neurology. 2011; 77 (24): 2123-2127.

8. Langner S, Buelow R, Fleck S, Angermaier A, Kirsch M. Management of intracranial incidental findings on brain MRI. Rofo. 2016; 188 (12): 1123-1133.

9. Morris Z, Whiteley WN, Longstreth WT Jr, Weber F, Lee YC, Tsushima Y et al. Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2009; 339: b3016.

10. Royal JM, Peterson BS. The risks and benefits of searching for incidental findings in MRI research scans. J Law Med Ethics. 2008; 36 (2): 305-14, 212.

11. Gibson LM, Paul L, Chappell FM, Macleod M, Whiteley WN, Al-Shahi Salman R et al. Potentially serious incidental findings on brain and body magnetic resonance imaging of apparently asymptomatic adults: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2018; 363: k4577.

12. Hoggard N, Darwent G, Capener D, Wilkinson ID, Griffiths PD. The high incidence and bioethics of findings on magnetic resonance brain imaging of normal volunteers for neuroscience research. J Med Ethics. 2009; 35 (3): 194-199.

13. Boutet C, Vassal F, Celle S, Schneider FC, Barthélémy JC, Laurent B et al. Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging in the elderly:the PROOF study. Brain Imaging Behav. 2017; 11 (1): 293-299.

14. Sandeman EM, Hernandez Mdel C, Morris Z, Bastin ME, Murray C, Gow AJ et al. Incidental findings on brain MR imaging in older community-dwelling subjects are common but serious medical consequences are rare: a cohort study. PLoS One. 2013; 8 (8): e71467.

15. Illes J. 'Pandora's box' of incidental findings in brain imaging research. Nature Clinical Practice Neurology. 2006; 2 (2): 60-61.

16. Ata Korkmaz HA. Relationship between the earlobe crease and brain white matter abnormalities in apparently healthy subjects. Turk J Med Sci. 2019; 49 (2): 604-609.

17. Wolf SM, Paradise J, Caga-anan C. The law of incidental findings in human subjects research: establishing researchers' duties. J Law Med Ethics. 2008; 36 (2): 361-383, 214.

18. Gracia D, Júdez J. (Editores) Ética en la práctica clínica. Madrid España. Triacastela. 2004.

19. De Prada A. Pablo de Lora y Marina Gascón. Bioética. Principios, desafíos, debates. Alianza, Madrid, 2008, 394. Persona y Derecho. 2018; (61): 331-335.

20. González R. Arnais Gracioano: Bioética: un nuevo paradigma. De ética aplicada a ética digna. Madrid España. Tecnos. 2016, 244.

21. Schur EA, Melhorn SJ, Oh SK, Lacy JM, Berkseth KE, Guyenet SJ et al. Radiologic evidence that hypothalamic gliosis is associated with obesity and insulin resistance in humans. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2015; 23 (11): 2142-2148.

22. Stip E, Miron JP, Nolin M, Letourneau G, Bernazzani O, Chamelian L et al. Incidentaloma discoveries in the course of neuroimaging research. Can J Neurol Sci. 2019; 46 (3): 275-279.

23. Bunnik EM, van Bodegom L, Pinxten W, de Beaufort ID, Vernooij MW. Ethical framework for the detection, management and communication of incidental findings in imaging studies, building on an interview study of researchers' practices and perspectives. BMC Med Ethics. 2017; 18 (1): 10.