scholarly journals Chest X-Ray Has Poor Diagnostic Accuracy and Prognostic Significance in COVID-19: A Propensity Matched Database Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aditya Borakati ◽  
Adrian Perera ◽  
James Johnson ◽  
Tara Sood
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
Health Science ◽  
British Society ◽  
Imaging Features ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray

Objectives: To identify the diagnostic accuracy of common imaging modalities, chest X-ray (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of COVID-19 in the general emergency population in the UK and to find the association between imaging features and outcomes in these patients. Design: Retrospective analysis of electronic patient records Setting: Tertiary academic health science centre and designated centre for high consequence infectious diseases in London, UK. Participants: 1,198 patients who attended the emergency department with paired RT-PCR swabs for SARS-CoV 2 and CXR between 16th March and 16th April 2020 Main outcome measures: Sensitivity and specificity of CXR and CT for diagnosis of COVID-19 using the British Society of Thoracic Imaging reporting templates. Reference standard was any reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) positive naso-oropharyngeal swab within 30 days of attendance. Odds ratios of CXR in association with vital signs, laboratory values and 30-day outcomes were calculated. Results: Sensitivity and specificity of CXR for COVID-19 diagnosis were 0.56 (95% CI 0.51-0.60) and 0.60 (95% CI 0.54-0.65), respectively. For CT scans these were 0.85 (95% CI 0.79-0.90) and 0.50 (95% CI 0.41-0.60), respectively. This gave a statistically significant mean increase in sensitivity with CT compared with CXR, of 29% (95% CI 19%-38%, p<0.0001). Specificity was not significantly different between the two modalities. Chest X-ray findings were not statistically significantly or clinical meaningfully associated with vital signs, laboratory parameters or 30-day outcomes. Conclusions: Computed tomography has substantially improved diagnostic performance over CXR in COVID-19. CT should be strongly considered in the initial assessment for suspected COVID-19. This gives potential for increased sensitivity and considerably faster turnaround time, where capacity allows and balanced against excess radiation exposure risk.

scholarly journals Diagnostic accuracy of X-ray versus CT in COVID-19: a propensity-matched database study

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e042946
Author(s):  
Aditya Borakati ◽  
Adrian Perera ◽  
James Johnson ◽  
Tara Sood
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
Health Science ◽  
British Society ◽  
Initial Assessment ◽  
Imaging Features ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Thoracic Imaging ◽  
X Ray

ObjectivesTo identify the diagnostic accuracy of common imaging modalities, chest X-ray (CXR) and CT, for diagnosis of COVID-19 in the general emergency population in the UK and to find the association between imaging features and outcomes in these patients.DesignRetrospective analysis of electronic patient records.SettingTertiary academic health science centre and designated centre for high consequence infectious diseases in London, UK.Participants1198 patients who attended the emergency department with paired reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) swabs for SARS-CoV-2 and CXR between 16 March and 16 April 2020.Main outcome measuresSensitivity and specificity of CXR and CT for diagnosis of COVID-19 using the British Society of Thoracic Imaging reporting templates. Reference standard was any RT-PCR positive naso-oropharyngeal swab within 30 days of attendance. ORs of CXR in association with vital signs, laboratory values and 30-day outcomes were calculated.ResultsSensitivity and specificity of CXR for COVID-19 diagnosis were 0.56 (95% CI 0.51 to 0.60) and 0.60 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.65), respectively. For CT scans, these were 0.85 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.50 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.60), respectively. This gave a statistically significant mean increase in sensitivity with CT of 29% (95% CI 19% to 38%, p<0.0001) compared with CXR. Specificity was not significantly different between the two modalities.CXR findings were not statistically significantly or clinically meaningfully associated with vital signs, laboratory parameters or 30-day outcomes.ConclusionsCT has substantially improved diagnostic performance over CXR in COVID-19. CT should be strongly considered in the initial assessment for suspected COVID-19. This gives potential for increased sensitivity and considerably faster turnaround time, where capacity allows and balanced against excess radiation exposure risk.

scholarly journals Cohort Study: The Accuracy of Screening Methods of COVID-19 in Pregnancy: Practical Approach in Low Resources Health Services

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Ilham Aldika Akbar ◽  
Khanizyah Erza Gumilar ◽  
Eccita Rahestyningtyas ◽  
Manggala Pasca Wardhana ◽  
Pungky Mulawardhana ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Antibody Test ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Low Middle Income Countries ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Rapid Antibody

Background All pregnant women in labor should be universally screened for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) during pandemic periods using Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test. In many low-middle income countries, screening method was developed as an initial examination because of limited availability of RT-PCR tests. Objectives This study aims to evaluate the screening methods of COVID-19 accuracy in pregnant women. Material and Methods We recruited all pregnant women with suspicion of COVID-19 from April - August 2020 at Universitas Airlangga hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia. The participant was divided into two groups based on RT-PCR results: COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 group. The proportion of positive signs & symptoms, rapid antibody test, abnormal findings in chest x-ray, and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) value were then compared between both groups. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV), and diagnostic accuracy (DOR) were calculated. Results A total 141 pregnant women with suspected COVID-19 cases were recruited for this study. This consist of 62 COVID-19 cases (43.9%) and 79 non COVID-19 pregnant women (56.1%). The sensitivity, spesificity, PPV, NPV, and diagnostic accuracy of each parameter are as follow: clinical sign & symptoms (24.19%, 75.95%, 3.92%, 96.11%, 65.87%), rapid antibody test (72.73%, 35.06%, 4.35%, 96.94%, 36.53%), chest x-ray (40.68%, 59.45%, 3.92%, 96.11%, 58.76%), and NLR > 5.8 (41.38%, 72%, 5.66%, 96.80%, 70.81%). Conclusions The use of combined screening methods can classify pregnant women with high-risk COVID-19 before definitively diagnosed with RT-PCR. This practice will help to reduce RT-PCR need in a limited resources country.

Chest X-Rays Findings in Patients Positive for COVID 19 at Sheikh Zayed Hospital Lahore

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 1196-1199
Author(s):  
A. Z. Sheikh ◽  
Z. Tariq ◽  
S. Noor ◽  
A. Ambreen ◽  
S. Awan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ground Glass Opacity ◽  
British Society ◽  
Ground Glass ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Middle Zone ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Thoracic Imaging ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray

Aim: To assess the results of chest x ray radiographs of patients positive for Covid-19, presented at the tertiary care hospital according to the classification by the British Society of Thoracic Imaging (BSTI. Place and Duration: In COVID-19 Ward (Department of Medicine) Sheikh Zayed Hospital, Lahore for three months duration from January 2021 to March 2021. Methods: A total of 96 patients were selected. In this observational study, positive COVID-19 patient determined by the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were enrolled for this study above the age of 14 years. CXR results were classified conferring to BSTI documentation and classification in terms of percentage and frequency. Results: Chest rays of 96 patients who tested positive for Covid-19 by RT-PCR over the age of 14 years were examined. Chest X-rays are classified according to the BSTI Covid-19 X-ray classification. Out of 96 patients, 10 patients (10.41%) had normal chest x-rays, 19 (19.80%) patients had classic bilateral, peripheral and basal consolidation / ground glass opacity (GMO), 60 (62.5%) had unspecified group,7(7.29%) patients have poor quality X-ray film. The unilateral involvement was noticed in 15 and bilateral in 49 patients, 12 of the patients had diffuse involvement on chest radiograph and peripheral involvement in 39 patients. According to regional dominance, 41 of the unspecified (42.70%) had middle and lower lung involvement, 7 (7.29%) had only the middle zone, and 8 (8.33%) had involvement of lower zone. Conclusions: In this study, Covid-19 chest X-rays are usually presented as ground glass opacity, mixed consolidation with GGOs in the middle and lower peripheral areas of the bilateral lung. Chest X-ray BSTI classification is used to classify Covid-19 severity in our patients, thus differentiating in the classic Covid-19 of the middle zone versus low zone involvement. Keywords: Consolidation, Covid, Ground Glass Opacity, Chest Image.

Should Chest X-ray Be Used in Diagnosing COVID-19?

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Cristina Z. San Jose ◽  
Valentin C. Dones
Keyword(s):  
British Society ◽  
Normal Lung ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Thoracic Imaging ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Canadian Association ◽  
Lung Abnormalities ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Low Sensitivity ◽  
Pcr Test

While chest x-ray is readily available and may precede RT-PCR test, chest x-ray has low sensitivity early in the COVID-19 disease and shows non-specific lung abnormalities in COVID-19 patients. Chest x-ray is part of the initial diagnostic tool used on COVID-19 patients in some hospitals as it yields fast results compared with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Chest Computed Tomography (CT) has been reported to be more sensitive than chest x-ray in determining the presence of COVID-19. Chest x-ray findings in confirmed COVID-19 patients show:  Normal lung findings early in the illness and in mildly symptomatic patients Typical ground-glass opacities and consolidation in the lung periphery Lung abnormalities are non-specific and may likewise be present in other infections and coronavirus-types of pneumonia The American College of Radiology (ACR), Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Canadian Association of Radiologists (CAR), Canadian Society of Thoracic Radiology (CSTR), and British Society of Thoracic Imaging do not recommend the use of chest x-ray to diagnose COVID-19. The Fleisher Society, composed of radiologists and pulmonologists in ten countries, does not recommend a chest x-ray for patients suspected of mild COVID-19. A chest x-ray is recommended for patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 needing immediate triage and patients at high risk for disease progression. Despite presence of chest x-ray findings suggesting COVID-19, RT-PCR test remains the standard diagnostic procedure.

scholarly journals Radiological profile of patients undergoing Chest X-ray and computed tomography scans during COVID-19 outbreak

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sohail Ahmed Khan ◽  
Murli Manohar ◽  
Maria Khan ◽  
Samita Asad ◽  
Syed Omair Adil
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
P Value ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Lung Involvement ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Computed Tomography Scans ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Bilateral Lung

Background & Objective: Radiology has played a significant role in the diagnosis and quantifying the severity of COVID 19 pulmonary disease. This study was conducted to assess patterns and severity of COVID-19 pulmonary disease based on radiological imaging. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in a large tertiary care public sector teaching hospital of Karachi, Pakistan from June 2020 till August 2020. All confirmed and suspected COVID-19 patients referred for chest X-rays and computed tomography (CT) scans were evaluated along with RT-PCR results. Suspected patients were followed for RT-PCR. Radiological features and severity of imaging studies were determined. Results: Of 533 patients in whom X-rays were performed, majority had severe/critical findings, i.e., 304 (57.03%). Of 97 patients in whom CT scan was performed, mild/moderate findings were observed in 63 (64.94%) patients. Of 472 patients with abnormal X-rays, majority presented with alveolar pattern 459 (97.2%), bilateral lung involvement 453 (89.6%), and consolidation 356 (75.4%). Moreover, lobar predominance showed lower zone preponderance in 446 (94.5%) patients. Of 88 patients with abnormal CT findings, ground-glass opacity (GGO) 87 (98.9%) and crazy paving 69 (78.4%) were the most common findings. An insignificantly higher association of PCR positive cases was observed with severe/critical X-rays (p-value 0.076) and CT scan findings (p-value 0.431). Conclusion: Most common patterns on CT scans were GGO and crazy paving. While on chest radiographs, bilateral lung involvement with alveolar pattern and consolidation were most common findings. On X-rays, majority had severe/critical whereas CT scan had mild/moderate findings. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.5.4290 How to cite this:Khan SA, Manohar M, Khan M, Asad S, Adil SO. Radiological profile of patients undergoing Chest X-ray and computed tomography scans during COVID-19 outbreak. Pak J Med Sci. 2021;37(5):---------. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.5.4290 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

scholarly journals Higher Accuracy of Lung Ultrasound over Chest X-ray for Early Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 3481
Author(s):  
Javier Martínez Redondo ◽  
Carles Comas Rodríguez ◽  
Jesús Pujol Salud ◽  
Montserrat Crespo Pons ◽  
Cristina García Serrano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Ultrasound Images ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Lower Specificity ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Interstitial Disease ◽  
Higher Sensitivity

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly strained healthcare systems worldwide. The reference standard for diagnosis is a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, but results are not immediate and sensibility is variable. Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound compared to chest X-ray for COVID-19 pneumonia. Design and Setting: A retrospective analysis of symptomatic patients admitted into one primary care centre in Spain between March and September 2020. Method: Patients’ chest X-rays and lung ultrasounds were categorized as normal or pathologic. RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 infection. Pathologic lung ultrasound images were further categorized as showing either local or diffuse interstitial disease. McNemar and Fisher tests were used to compare diagnostic accuracy. Results: Most of the 212 patients presented fever at admission, either as a standalone symptom (37.74% of patients) or together with others (72.17% of patients). The positive predictive value of the lung ultrasound was 90% for the diffuse interstitial pattern and 46.92% for local pattern. The lung ultrasound had a significantly higher sensitivity (82.75%) (p < 0.001), but lower specificity (71%) than the chest X-ray (54.02% and 86%, respectively) (p = 0.008) for identifying interstitial lung disease. Moreover, sensitivity of the lung ultrasound for severe interstitial disease was 100%, and was significantly higher than the chest X-ray (58.33%) (p = 0.002). Conclusion: The lung ultrasound is more accurate than the chest X-ray for identifying patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and it is especially useful for those presenting diffuse interstitial disease.

scholarly journals Chest X-ray findings in COVID-19: A Pictorial Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (Supp-1) ◽  
pp. 44-49
Author(s):  
Nasir Khan ◽  
Muhammad Umar ◽  
Maria Khaliq ◽  
Hina Hanif ◽  
Misbah Durrani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
British Society ◽  
Ground Glass ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Radiological Investigation ◽  
Thoracic Imaging ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Pictorial Review ◽  
Clinical Scenarios ◽  
Chest X Ray

Introduction: Chest X-ray and Computed tomography(CT) of chest play an important role in the diagnosis and management of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). As chest CT may not be readily available in most clinical setups X-ray Chest plays a pivotal role in such clinical scenarios and an irreplaceable initial radiological investigation of these patients. Objective: The objective of this article is to identify and elaborate the commonest appearances and patterns of lung changes on Chest X rays in COVID-19 positive patients confirmed on RT-PCR COVID testing. Materials and Methods: Cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study of Chest X-ray findings of 294  RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted across 3 hospitals (Rawalpindi institute of urology (RIU), Benazir Bhutto Hospital (BBH) and Holy Family Hospital (HFH)) from March 30th, 2020 till April 30th, 2020. CXR was analyzed for consolidation patches, ground-glass opacification (GGO), multi-lobe involvement, bilateral distribution, and pleural fluid. The chest X-ray with positive findings was graded into mild, moderate, and severe grades using BSTI (British Society of Thoracic imaging) guidelines. Results: Mean age of study patients was 45.5 years. Among the study population 230 (78.2 %) were male and 64 (21.8%) female. On baseline chest X rays, consolidations were the commonest finding (n=84, 28.5%), followed by ground-glass opacity (n=17, 5.7 %). The more common locations were peripheral and lower zones, and the majority had bilateral lung involvement (Table 1). Pleural effusions were found in only 5 of the study patients.  Among these patients, 187 (63.6%) had an initial normal chest X-ray. Moreover, 35, 34, and 38patients had mild, moderate, and severe diseases respectively. Conclusion: Chest X-ray is an important initial radiological investigation for COVID 19 patients and plays an important role in the management during the course of the disease.

scholarly journals Efficacy of chest X-ray in the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia: comparison with computed tomography through a simplified scoring system designed for triage

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akın Çinkooğlu ◽  
Selen Bayraktaroğlu ◽  
Naim Ceylan ◽  
Recep Savaş
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Intensive Care Units ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Imaging Modality ◽  
Ground Glass Opacity ◽  
Initial Presentation ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray

Abstract Background There is no consensus on the imaging modality to be used in the diagnosis and management of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. The purpose of this study was to make a comparison between computed tomography (CT) and chest X-ray (CXR) through a scoring system that can be beneficial to the clinicians in making the triage of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia at their initial presentation to the hospital. Results Patients with a negative CXR (30.1%) had significantly lower computed tomography score (CTS) (p < 0.001). Among the lung zones where the only infiltration pattern was ground glass opacity (GGO) on CT images, the ratio of abnormality seen on CXRs was 21.6%. The cut-off value of X-ray score (XRS) to distinguish the patients who needed intensive care at follow-up (n = 12) was 6 (AUC = 0.933, 95% CI = 0.886–0.979, 100% sensitivity, 81% specificity). Conclusions Computed tomography is more effective in the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia at the initial presentation due to the ease detection of GGOs. However, a baseline CXR taken after admission to the hospital can be valuable in predicting patients to be monitored in the intensive care units.

AB0796 THE EVALUATION OF LUNG DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE AT THE ONSET OF INFLAMMATORY RHEUMATIC DISEASES WITH INTERSTITIAL LUNG DISEASE

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1422.3-1423
Author(s):  
T. Hoffmann ◽  
P. Oelzner ◽  
F. Marcus ◽  
M. Förster ◽  
J. Böttcher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Monoxide ◽  
Interstitial Lung Disease ◽  
Lung Function ◽  
Lung Disease ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Lung Function Test ◽  
Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Function Test ◽  
Chest X Ray

Background:Interstitial lung disease (ILD) in inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) is associated with increased mortality. Moreover, the lung is one of the most effected organs on IRD. Consequently, screening methods were required to the detect ILD in IRD.Objectives:The objective of the following study is to evaluate the diagnostic value of lung function test, chest x-ray and HR-CT of the lung in the detection of ILD at the onset of IRD.Methods:The study is designed as a case-control study and includes 126 patients with a newly diagnosed IRD. It was matched by gender, age and the performance of lung function test and chest x-ray. The sensitivity and specificity were verified by crosstabs and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The study cohort was divided in two groups (ILD group: n = 63 and control group: n = 63). If possible, all patients received a lung function test and optional a chest x-ray. Patients with pathological findings in the screening tests (chest x-ray or reduced diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) < 80 %) maintained a high-resolution computer tomography (HR-CT) of the lung. Additionally, an immunological bronchioalveolar lavage was performed in the ILD group as gold standard for the detection of ILD.Results:The DLCO (< 80 %) revealed a sensitivity of 83.6 % and specificity of 45.8 % for the detection of ILD. Other examined parameter of lung function test showed no sufficient sensitivity as screening test (FVC = Forced Vital Capacity, FEV1 = Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second, TLC = Total Lung Capacity, TLCO = Transfer factor of the Lung for carbon monoxide). Also, a combination of different parameter did not increase the sensitivity. The sensitivity and specificity of chest x-ray for the verification of ILD was 64.2 % versus 73.6 %. The combination of DLCO (< 80 %) and chest x-ray showed a sensitivity with 95.2 % and specificity with 38.7 %. The highest sensitivity (95.2 %) and specificity (77.4 %) was observed for the combination of DLCO (< 80 %) and HR-CT of the lung.Conclusion:The study highlighted that a reduced DLCO in lung function test is associated with a lung involvement in IRD. DLCO represented a potential screening parameter for lung manifestation in IRD. Especially patients with suspected vasculitis should receive an additional chest x-ray. Based on the high sensitivity of DLCO in combination with chest x-ray or HR-CT for the detection of ILD in IRD, all patients with a reduced DLCO (< 80%) should obtained an imaging of the lung.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document