Underdiagnosis of umbilical hernias in CT scans in a multicenter study – the radiologically neglected pathology and its surgical implications

Purpose Umbilical hernias (UH) have a higher prevalence than previously considered. With the high workload radiologists must endure, UH can be missed when interpreting a computed tomography scan (CT). The clinical implications of its misdiagnosis are yet to be determined. Unreporting could lead to c...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery 2024-10, Vol.28 (5), p.1775-1781
Hauptverfasser: Alvarez-Lozada, Luis Adrian, Arrambide-Garza, Francisco Javier, Quiroga-Garza, Alejandro, Huerta-Sanchez, Monica Catalina, Escobar-Luna, Ana, Sada-Treviño, Miguel Antonio, Ramos-Proaño, Carlos Enrique, Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo Enrique
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1781
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1775
container_title Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery
container_volume 28
creator Alvarez-Lozada, Luis Adrian
Arrambide-Garza, Francisco Javier
Quiroga-Garza, Alejandro
Huerta-Sanchez, Monica Catalina
Escobar-Luna, Ana
Sada-Treviño, Miguel Antonio
Ramos-Proaño, Carlos Enrique
Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo Enrique
description Purpose Umbilical hernias (UH) have a higher prevalence than previously considered. With the high workload radiologists must endure, UH can be missed when interpreting a computed tomography scan (CT). The clinical implications of its misdiagnosis are yet to be determined. Unreporting could lead to content lesions in surgical approaches and other potential complications. The aim was to determine the prevalence of UH using CT scans, and the incidence of radiological reporting. Methods A multicenter, cross-sectional study was performed in four tertiary-level hospitals. CT scans were reviewed for abdominal wall defects at the umbilicus, and radiological reports were examined to compare findings. In the case of UH, transversal, anteroposterior, and craniocaudal lengths were obtained. Results A total of 1557 CTs were included, from which 971 (62.4%, 95% CI 0.59–0.64) had UH. Out of those, 629 (64.8%, 95% CI 0.61–0.67) of the defects were not included in the radiological report. Smaller UH (x̄: 7.7 × 6.0 mm) were more frequently missed. Of the reported UH, 187 (54.7%) included at least one axis measurement, 289 (84.5%) content description, and 146 (42.7%) whether or not there were complication signs. Conclusion There is a high prevalence of UH, and a high incidence of under-reporting. This raises the question of whether this is a population-based finding or the norm worldwide. The reason of under-reporting and the clinical implications of these must be addressed in further studies.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10029-024-03079-9
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3064920963</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3112656639</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-95d8ca4a93cc6d016fb2fa86c3538a70a13fadc80c3a5c1b5671f8993c1a11cb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kb1uHCEUhVGUyHYcv0CKCClNmolhmGGgjFb5kyylsWt0B5hdLAY2wBTb5Q1S5A3zJGF2nR-lcHPvle53zkUchF5S8pYSMlznWlvZkLZrCCODbOQTdEHbTjSyJd3Tf-Zz9Dzne0KI6Lg4Q-dMCDaQgV-g73fB2GQcbEPMLuM44WUenXcaPN7ZFBxk7ALe3OKsIRxnwPPii9M2FJtwLos54J_ffuCysziBcdHH7ar3Bxzs1ltdrMF7KLt1ccAQDHYl47ykI4bdvF_vFRdDfoGeTeCzvXrol-juw_vbzafm5svHz5t3N41ue14a2RuhoQPJtOaGUD6N7QSCa9YzAQMByiYwWhDNoNd07PlAJyErToFSPbJL9Obku0_x62JzUbPL2noPwcYlK0Z4V39OclbR1_-h93FJob5OMUpb3nPOZKXaE6VTzDnZSe2TmyEdFCVqjUud4lI1LnWMS62iVw_Wyzhb80fyO58KsBOQ6ypsbfp7-xHbX0V_o6Y</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3112656639</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Underdiagnosis of umbilical hernias in CT scans in a multicenter study – the radiologically neglected pathology and its surgical implications</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Alvarez-Lozada, Luis Adrian ; Arrambide-Garza, Francisco Javier ; Quiroga-Garza, Alejandro ; Huerta-Sanchez, Monica Catalina ; Escobar-Luna, Ana ; Sada-Treviño, Miguel Antonio ; Ramos-Proaño, Carlos Enrique ; Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo Enrique</creator><creatorcontrib>Alvarez-Lozada, Luis Adrian ; Arrambide-Garza, Francisco Javier ; Quiroga-Garza, Alejandro ; Huerta-Sanchez, Monica Catalina ; Escobar-Luna, Ana ; Sada-Treviño, Miguel Antonio ; Ramos-Proaño, Carlos Enrique ; Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo Enrique</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose Umbilical hernias (UH) have a higher prevalence than previously considered. With the high workload radiologists must endure, UH can be missed when interpreting a computed tomography scan (CT). The clinical implications of its misdiagnosis are yet to be determined. Unreporting could lead to content lesions in surgical approaches and other potential complications. The aim was to determine the prevalence of UH using CT scans, and the incidence of radiological reporting. Methods A multicenter, cross-sectional study was performed in four tertiary-level hospitals. CT scans were reviewed for abdominal wall defects at the umbilicus, and radiological reports were examined to compare findings. In the case of UH, transversal, anteroposterior, and craniocaudal lengths were obtained. Results A total of 1557 CTs were included, from which 971 (62.4%, 95% CI 0.59–0.64) had UH. Out of those, 629 (64.8%, 95% CI 0.61–0.67) of the defects were not included in the radiological report. Smaller UH (x̄: 7.7 × 6.0 mm) were more frequently missed. Of the reported UH, 187 (54.7%) included at least one axis measurement, 289 (84.5%) content description, and 146 (42.7%) whether or not there were complication signs. Conclusion There is a high prevalence of UH, and a high incidence of under-reporting. This raises the question of whether this is a population-based finding or the norm worldwide. The reason of under-reporting and the clinical implications of these must be addressed in further studies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1248-9204</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1265-4906</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1248-9204</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10029-024-03079-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38837076</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Paris: Springer Paris</publisher><subject>Abdominal Surgery ; Abdominal wall ; Adult ; Aged ; Computed tomography ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Diagnostic Errors - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Female ; Hernia, Umbilical - diagnostic imaging ; Hernia, Umbilical - surgery ; Hernias ; Humans ; Male ; Medical imaging ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Original Article ; Population studies ; Prevalence ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Umbilicus</subject><ispartof>Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2024-10, Vol.28 (5), p.1775-1781</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-95d8ca4a93cc6d016fb2fa86c3538a70a13fadc80c3a5c1b5671f8993c1a11cb3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5398-247X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10029-024-03079-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10029-024-03079-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38837076$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Alvarez-Lozada, Luis Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arrambide-Garza, Francisco Javier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quiroga-Garza, Alejandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huerta-Sanchez, Monica Catalina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escobar-Luna, Ana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sada-Treviño, Miguel Antonio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramos-Proaño, Carlos Enrique</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo Enrique</creatorcontrib><title>Underdiagnosis of umbilical hernias in CT scans in a multicenter study – the radiologically neglected pathology and its surgical implications</title><title>Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery</title><addtitle>Hernia</addtitle><addtitle>Hernia</addtitle><description>Purpose Umbilical hernias (UH) have a higher prevalence than previously considered. With the high workload radiologists must endure, UH can be missed when interpreting a computed tomography scan (CT). The clinical implications of its misdiagnosis are yet to be determined. Unreporting could lead to content lesions in surgical approaches and other potential complications. The aim was to determine the prevalence of UH using CT scans, and the incidence of radiological reporting. Methods A multicenter, cross-sectional study was performed in four tertiary-level hospitals. CT scans were reviewed for abdominal wall defects at the umbilicus, and radiological reports were examined to compare findings. In the case of UH, transversal, anteroposterior, and craniocaudal lengths were obtained. Results A total of 1557 CTs were included, from which 971 (62.4%, 95% CI 0.59–0.64) had UH. Out of those, 629 (64.8%, 95% CI 0.61–0.67) of the defects were not included in the radiological report. Smaller UH (x̄: 7.7 × 6.0 mm) were more frequently missed. Of the reported UH, 187 (54.7%) included at least one axis measurement, 289 (84.5%) content description, and 146 (42.7%) whether or not there were complication signs. Conclusion There is a high prevalence of UH, and a high incidence of under-reporting. This raises the question of whether this is a population-based finding or the norm worldwide. The reason of under-reporting and the clinical implications of these must be addressed in further studies.</description><subject>Abdominal Surgery</subject><subject>Abdominal wall</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Diagnostic Errors - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hernia, Umbilical - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Hernia, Umbilical - surgery</subject><subject>Hernias</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Population studies</subject><subject>Prevalence</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><subject>Umbilicus</subject><issn>1248-9204</issn><issn>1265-4906</issn><issn>1248-9204</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kb1uHCEUhVGUyHYcv0CKCClNmolhmGGgjFb5kyylsWt0B5hdLAY2wBTb5Q1S5A3zJGF2nR-lcHPvle53zkUchF5S8pYSMlznWlvZkLZrCCODbOQTdEHbTjSyJd3Tf-Zz9Dzne0KI6Lg4Q-dMCDaQgV-g73fB2GQcbEPMLuM44WUenXcaPN7ZFBxk7ALe3OKsIRxnwPPii9M2FJtwLos54J_ffuCysziBcdHH7ar3Bxzs1ltdrMF7KLt1ccAQDHYl47ykI4bdvF_vFRdDfoGeTeCzvXrol-juw_vbzafm5svHz5t3N41ue14a2RuhoQPJtOaGUD6N7QSCa9YzAQMByiYwWhDNoNd07PlAJyErToFSPbJL9Obku0_x62JzUbPL2noPwcYlK0Z4V39OclbR1_-h93FJob5OMUpb3nPOZKXaE6VTzDnZSe2TmyEdFCVqjUud4lI1LnWMS62iVw_Wyzhb80fyO58KsBOQ6ypsbfp7-xHbX0V_o6Y</recordid><startdate>20241001</startdate><enddate>20241001</enddate><creator>Alvarez-Lozada, Luis Adrian</creator><creator>Arrambide-Garza, Francisco Javier</creator><creator>Quiroga-Garza, Alejandro</creator><creator>Huerta-Sanchez, Monica Catalina</creator><creator>Escobar-Luna, Ana</creator><creator>Sada-Treviño, Miguel Antonio</creator><creator>Ramos-Proaño, Carlos Enrique</creator><creator>Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo Enrique</creator><general>Springer Paris</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5398-247X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241001</creationdate><title>Underdiagnosis of umbilical hernias in CT scans in a multicenter study – the radiologically neglected pathology and its surgical implications</title><author>Alvarez-Lozada, Luis Adrian ; Arrambide-Garza, Francisco Javier ; Quiroga-Garza, Alejandro ; Huerta-Sanchez, Monica Catalina ; Escobar-Luna, Ana ; Sada-Treviño, Miguel Antonio ; Ramos-Proaño, Carlos Enrique ; Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo Enrique</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-95d8ca4a93cc6d016fb2fa86c3538a70a13fadc80c3a5c1b5671f8993c1a11cb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Abdominal Surgery</topic><topic>Abdominal wall</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Diagnostic Errors - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hernia, Umbilical - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Hernia, Umbilical - surgery</topic><topic>Hernias</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Population studies</topic><topic>Prevalence</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</topic><topic>Umbilicus</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Alvarez-Lozada, Luis Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arrambide-Garza, Francisco Javier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quiroga-Garza, Alejandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huerta-Sanchez, Monica Catalina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escobar-Luna, Ana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sada-Treviño, Miguel Antonio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramos-Proaño, Carlos Enrique</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo Enrique</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Alvarez-Lozada, Luis Adrian</au><au>Arrambide-Garza, Francisco Javier</au><au>Quiroga-Garza, Alejandro</au><au>Huerta-Sanchez, Monica Catalina</au><au>Escobar-Luna, Ana</au><au>Sada-Treviño, Miguel Antonio</au><au>Ramos-Proaño, Carlos Enrique</au><au>Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo Enrique</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Underdiagnosis of umbilical hernias in CT scans in a multicenter study – the radiologically neglected pathology and its surgical implications</atitle><jtitle>Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery</jtitle><stitle>Hernia</stitle><addtitle>Hernia</addtitle><date>2024-10-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1775</spage><epage>1781</epage><pages>1775-1781</pages><issn>1248-9204</issn><issn>1265-4906</issn><eissn>1248-9204</eissn><abstract>Purpose Umbilical hernias (UH) have a higher prevalence than previously considered. With the high workload radiologists must endure, UH can be missed when interpreting a computed tomography scan (CT). The clinical implications of its misdiagnosis are yet to be determined. Unreporting could lead to content lesions in surgical approaches and other potential complications. The aim was to determine the prevalence of UH using CT scans, and the incidence of radiological reporting. Methods A multicenter, cross-sectional study was performed in four tertiary-level hospitals. CT scans were reviewed for abdominal wall defects at the umbilicus, and radiological reports were examined to compare findings. In the case of UH, transversal, anteroposterior, and craniocaudal lengths were obtained. Results A total of 1557 CTs were included, from which 971 (62.4%, 95% CI 0.59–0.64) had UH. Out of those, 629 (64.8%, 95% CI 0.61–0.67) of the defects were not included in the radiological report. Smaller UH (x̄: 7.7 × 6.0 mm) were more frequently missed. Of the reported UH, 187 (54.7%) included at least one axis measurement, 289 (84.5%) content description, and 146 (42.7%) whether or not there were complication signs. Conclusion There is a high prevalence of UH, and a high incidence of under-reporting. This raises the question of whether this is a population-based finding or the norm worldwide. The reason of under-reporting and the clinical implications of these must be addressed in further studies.</abstract><cop>Paris</cop><pub>Springer Paris</pub><pmid>38837076</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10029-024-03079-9</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5398-247X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1248-9204
ispartof Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2024-10, Vol.28 (5), p.1775-1781
issn 1248-9204
1265-4906
1248-9204
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3064920963
source MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals
subjects Abdominal Surgery
Abdominal wall
Adult
Aged
Computed tomography
Cross-Sectional Studies
Diagnostic Errors - statistics & numerical data
Female
Hernia, Umbilical - diagnostic imaging
Hernia, Umbilical - surgery
Hernias
Humans
Male
Medical imaging
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Original Article
Population studies
Prevalence
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
Umbilicus
title Underdiagnosis of umbilical hernias in CT scans in a multicenter study – the radiologically neglected pathology and its surgical implications
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T14%3A34%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Underdiagnosis%20of%20umbilical%20hernias%20in%20CT%20scans%20in%20a%20multicenter%20study%20%E2%80%93%20the%20radiologically%20neglected%20pathology%20and%20its%20surgical%20implications&rft.jtitle=Hernia%20:%20the%20journal%20of%20hernias%20and%20abdominal%20wall%20surgery&rft.au=Alvarez-Lozada,%20Luis%20Adrian&rft.date=2024-10-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1775&rft.epage=1781&rft.pages=1775-1781&rft.issn=1248-9204&rft.eissn=1248-9204&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10029-024-03079-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3112656639%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3112656639&rft_id=info:pmid/38837076&rfr_iscdi=true