Author
Listed:
- Alexander Ritter
- Maximilian Sabev
- Olivier Bonny
- Gregoire Wuerzner
- Thomas Ernandez
- Florian Buchkremer
- Stephan Segerer
- Daniel G Fuster
- Beat Roth
- Nilufar Mohebbi
- Lena Jellestad
- Andreas M Hoetker
- Carsten A Wagner
- Harald Seeger
Abstract
Introduction: Increasing use of low-dose abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans in clinical diagnostics and research offers high sensitivity for kidney stones with minimal radiation exposure. However, due to reduced specificity, incidental findings potentially lead to unnecessary follow-up, financial burden, and psychological distress. Gaps of knowledge remain regarding the prevalence of incidental findings and their financial and psychological consequences. This study investigates the prevalence of incidental findings in asymptomatic participants undergoing low-dose non-contrast CT scans and their economic and psychological sequelae. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multicentric observational study using data from the assessment for the control group of the Swiss Kidney Stone Cohort (SKSC). Low-dose non-contrast CT scans were analyzed for incidental findings, cost and psychological impact. Statistical analyses evaluated participant characteristics, financial and psychological consequences. Results: 229 participants underwent low-dose non-contrast CT scans, with 112 correctly completing the psychological questionnaires. The mean age was 42.9 years, and 56.3% were male. Incidental findings were observed in 47.2% (n = 108) of participants, with 16.6% having multiple findings. Kidney-related findings were the most prevalent, accounting for 35% of all findings. Of the incidental findings, 37.9% were classified as “incidentalomas” by the American College of Radiology (ACR) guidelines, and 15.7% of participants had findings that warranted follow-up according to radiology reports. In terms of costs, follow-up procedures, including imaging, consultations, and surgeries, incurred a total expense of 44’988 CHF, averaging 1967 CHF per participant and 2’999 CHF per incidental finding requiring follow-up. Surgical interventions were necessary for three participants, with individual costs reaching up to 35’208 CHF. Psychological assessment revealed that emotional distress and level of concern significantly differed across resilience levels and categories of CT findings. Participants with high resilience demonstrated lower emotional distress and concern, while those with CT findings requiring follow-up exhibited higher distress. Emotional distress was significantly greater in participants with follow-up findings compared to those without. Conclusions: Low-dose non-contrast abdominal CT scans often reveal incidental findings. Follow-up tests and procedures incurred significant financial costs, occasionally even leading to unnecessary surgical or non-surgical interventions. Psychological assessments showed increased anxiety in participants requiring follow-up, particularly those with low resilience. Our findings highlight the need for improved management, patient information, and consideration of economic and psychological impacts of incidental findings in clinical research and routine in the future.
Suggested Citation
Alexander Ritter & Maximilian Sabev & Olivier Bonny & Gregoire Wuerzner & Thomas Ernandez & Florian Buchkremer & Stephan Segerer & Daniel G Fuster & Beat Roth & Nilufar Mohebbi & Lena Jellestad & Andr, 2025.
"Incidental findings on non-contrast abdominal computed tomography in an asymptomatic population: Prevalence, economic and health implications,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(8), pages 1-17, August.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0328049
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0328049
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0328049. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.