The Diagnostic Yield of Whole-Body MRI as a Multi-disease Screening Modality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Why clinicians should know about it

• Picked for Epidemiology (paper of the day, 3 October 2026): Systematic review/meta‑analysis of whole‑body MRI screening yield

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Disease screening is a mainstay of modern healthcare. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WBMRI) is marketed as a multi-disease screening modality. The diagnostic yield and clinical utility of WBMRI for population-based disease screening are uncertain. OBJECTIVES: Our systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize and critically appraise the available literature on WBMRI without an evidence-based indication. Our objective was to evaluate the diagnostic yield of WBMRI and assess the scope of findings. DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis searching MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL from inception through August 2025. This review was registered with PROSPERO (No.: CRD42024554848). Prespecified criteria for study inclusion included literature that reported WBMRI findings in a population without an evidence-based indication for WBMRI. Data appraisal was performed by two independent reviewers with summary data extracted from published reports. MAIN MEASURES: Outcomes evaluated included pooled proportions of individuals with no clinical findings reported, any clinical finding, non-malignant actionable findings that required subsequent diagnostic workup, and new cancer diagnoses. KEY RESULTS: In a pooled cohort of 18,043 individuals from 17 heterogeneous low-quality studies who underwent WBMRI, 16.9% (95% CI 5.1; 43.7) had no findings reported, while 78.0% (95% CI 44.9; 93.9) had a finding reported. Clinically actionable non-malignant findings were reported in 14.8% (95% CI 6.6-30.0%); 58.2% (95% CI 36.0; 77.5) of these individuals pursued additional laboratory work and/or imaging, and 20.8% (95% CI 9.7; 39.2) pursued a subsequent procedure. The prevalence of malignancy was 1.4% (95% CI 0.9-2.2%). Clinical outcomes associated with discovery of lesions could not be determined. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of WBMRIs performed in a population without an evidence-based indication result in findings that are normal or do not require follow-up. Clinical outcomes associated with discovery of actionable lesions are unknown. High-quality observational data or randomized trials are needed to inform the efficacy of WBMRI for multi-disease screening. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.