scholarly journals Automatic Classification Between COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Pneumonia Using Symptoms, Comorbidities, and Laboratory Findings: The Khorshid COVID Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamid Reza Marateb ◽  
Farzad Ziaie Nezhad ◽  
Mohammad Reza Mohebian ◽  
Ramin Sami ◽  
Shaghayegh Haghjooy Javanmard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ct Scan ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Symptom Duration ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Blood Tests ◽  
Diagnosis Method ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

Coronavirus disease-2019, also known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was a disaster in 2020. Accurate and early diagnosis of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is still essential for health policymaking. Reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has been performed as the operational gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis. We aimed to design and implement a reliable COVID-19 diagnosis method to provide the risk of infection using demographics, symptoms and signs, blood markers, and family history of diseases to have excellent agreement with the results obtained by the RT-PCR and CT-scan. Our study primarily used sample data from a 1-year hospital-based prospective COVID-19 open-cohort, the Khorshid COVID Cohort (KCC) study. A sample of 634 patients with COVID-19 and 118 patients with pneumonia with similar characteristics whose RT-PCR and chest CT scan were negative (as the control group) (dataset 1) was used to design the system and for internal validation. Two other online datasets, namely, some symptoms (dataset 2) and blood tests (dataset 3), were also analyzed. A combination of one-hot encoding, stability feature selection, over-sampling, and an ensemble classifier was used. Ten-fold stratified cross-validation was performed. In addition to gender and symptom duration, signs and symptoms, blood biomarkers, and comorbidities were selected. Performance indices of the cross-validated confusion matrix for dataset 1 were as follows: sensitivity of 96% [confidence interval, CI, 95%: 94–98], specificity of 95% [90–99], positive predictive value (PPV) of 99% [98–100], negative predictive value (NPV) of 82% [76–89], diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 496 [198–1,245], area under the ROC (AUC) of 0.96 [0.94–0.97], Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) of 0.87 [0.85–0.88], accuracy of 96% [94–98], and Cohen's Kappa of 0.86 [0.81–0.91]. The proposed algorithm showed excellent diagnosis accuracy and class-labeling agreement, and fair discriminant power. The AUC on the datasets 2 and 3 was 0.97 [0.96–0.98] and 0.92 [0.91–0.94], respectively. The most important feature was white blood cell count, shortness of breath, and C-reactive protein for datasets 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The proposed algorithm is, thus, a promising COVID-19 diagnosis method, which could be an amendment to simple blood tests and screening of symptoms. However, the RT-PCR and chest CT-scan, performed as the gold standard, are not 100% accurate.

scholarly journals A meta-analysis of accuracy and sensitivity of chest CT and RT-PCR in COVID-19 diagnosis

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Khatami ◽  
Mohammad Saatchi ◽  
Seyed Saeed Tamehri Zadeh ◽  
Zahra Sadat Aghamir ◽  
Alireza Namazi Shabestari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Reverse Transcriptase ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

AbstractNowadays there is an ongoing acute respiratory outbreak caused by the novel highly contagious coronavirus (COVID-19). The diagnostic protocol is based on quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and chests CT scan, with uncertain accuracy. This meta-analysis study determines the diagnostic value of an initial chest CT scan in patients with COVID-19 infection in comparison with RT-PCR. Three main databases; PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and EMBASE were systematically searched for all published literature from January 1st, 2019, to the 21st May 2020 with the keywords "COVID19 virus", "2019 novel coronavirus", "Wuhan coronavirus", "2019-nCoV", "X-Ray Computed Tomography", "Polymerase Chain Reaction", "Reverse Transcriptase PCR", and "PCR Reverse Transcriptase". All relevant case-series, cross-sectional, and cohort studies were selected. Data extraction and analysis were performed using STATA v.14.0SE (College Station, TX, USA) and RevMan 5. Among 1022 articles, 60 studies were eligible for totalizing 5744 patients. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of chest CT scan compared to RT-PCR were 87% (95% CI 85–90%), 46% (95% CI 29–63%), 69% (95% CI 56–72%), and 89% (95% CI 82–96%), respectively. It is important to rely on the repeated RT-PCR three times to give 99% accuracy, especially in negative samples. Regarding the overall diagnostic sensitivity of 87% for chest CT, the RT-PCR testing is essential and should be repeated to escape misdiagnosis.

scholarly journals The role of CT imaging for management of COVID-19 in epidemic area: early experience from a University Hospital

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikram rao Bollineni ◽  
Koenraad Hans Nieboer ◽  
Seema Döring ◽  
Nico Buls ◽  
Johan de Mey
Keyword(s):  
Ct Scan ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Ct Imaging ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Ct Findings ◽  
Epidemic Area ◽  
Chest Ct Scan ◽  
Pcr Test

Abstract Background To evaluate the clinical value of the chest CT scan compared to the reference standard real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in COVID-19 patients. Methods From March 29th to April 15th of 2020, a total of 240 patients with respiratory distress underwent both a low-dose chest CT scan and RT-PCR tests. The performance of chest CT in diagnosing COVID-19 was assessed with reference to the RT-PCR result. Two board-certified radiologists (mean 24 years of experience chest CT), blinded for the RT-PCR result, reviewed all scans and decided positive or negative chest CT findings by consensus. Results Out of 240 patients, 60% (144/240) had positive RT-PCR results and 89% (213/240) had a positive chest CT scans. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of chest CT in suggesting COVID-19 were 100% (95% CI: 97–100%, 144/240), 28% (95% CI: 19–38%, 27/240), 68% (95% CI: 65–70%) and 100%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of the chest CT suggesting COVID-19 was 71% (95% CI: 65–77%). Thirty-three patients with positive chest CT scan and negative RT-PCR test at baseline underwent repeat RT-PCR assay. In this subgroup, 21.2% (7/33) cases became RT-PCR positive. Conclusion Chest CT imaging has high sensitivity and high NPV for diagnosing COVID-19 and can be considered as an alternative primary screening tool for COVID-19 in epidemic areas. In addition, a negative RT-PCR test, but positive CT findings can still be suggestive of COVID-19 infection.

scholarly journals The exact place of PCR and chest CT in screening, staging, and diagnosis of Covid-19: A meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Khatami ◽  
Mohammad Saatchi ◽  
Seyed Saeed Tamehri Zadeh ◽  
Zahra Sadat Aghamir ◽  
Alireza Namazi Shabestari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Reverse Transcriptase ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

Abstract Introduction: Nowadays there is an ongoing acute respiratory outbreak causing by the novel highly contagious coronavirus (nCoV). There are two diagnostic protocol based on chest CT scan and quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) which their diagnostic accuracy is under the debate. We designed this meta-analysis study to determine the diagnostic value of initial chest CT scan in patients with nCoV infection in comparison with RT- PCR.Search strategy and statistical analysis: Three main databases the PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and EMBASE was systematically searched for all published literatures from January 1st, 2019, to the 27th march 2020 with key grouping of “COVID19 virus”, “2019 novel coronavirus”, “Wuhan coronavirus”, “2019-nCoV”, “X-Ray Computed Tomography”, “Polymerase Chain Reaction”, “Reverse Transcriptase PCR”, and “PCR Reverse Transcriptase”. All relevant case- series, cross-sectional, and cohort studies were selected. Data extraction was done in Excel 2007 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, CA) and their analysis was performed using STATA v.14.0SE (College Station, TX, USA) and RevMan 5.Result: From first recruited 668 articles we end up to the final 47 studies, which comprised a total sample size of 4238 patients. In compare to RT-PCR, the overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of chest CT scan were 86% (95% CI: 83% -90%), 43 % (95% CI: 26% -60%), 67% (95% CI: 57% -78%), and 84% (95% CI: 74% -95%) respectively. However the RT-PCR should be repeated for three times in order to give the 99% accuracy especially in negative samples.Conclusion: According to the acceptable sensitivity of chest CT scan, it can be employed complement to RT-PCR to diagnosis patients who are clinically suspicious for nCoV.

scholarly journals COVID-19 Pneumonia: Inter-Observer Agreement and Diagnostic Accuracy of Chest CT in Patients with Intermediate Clinical Probability

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Laure BRUN ◽  
Alexia GENCE-BRENEY ◽  
Julie TRICHEREAU ◽  
Marie-Christine BALLESTER ◽  
Marc VASSE ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Observer Agreement ◽  
Kappa Statistics ◽  
Operating Characteristics ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Clinical Probability ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

Abstract Objectives To assess inter-reader agreements and diagnostic accuracy of chest CT to identify COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with intermediate clinical probability during an acute disease outbreak.Methods:From March 20 to April 8, consecutive patients with intermediate clinical probability of COVID-19 pneumonia underwent a chest CT scan. Two independent chest radiologists blinded to clinical information and RT-PCR results retrospectively reviewed and classified images on a 1-5 confidence level scale for COVID-19 pneumonia. Agreements between radiologists were assessed with kappa statistics. Diagnostic accuracy of chest CT compared to RT-PCR assay and patient outcomes was measured using receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for COVID-19 pneumonia were calculated.Results: 319 patients with a mean age of 62.3 yo were included. Inter-observer agreement for highly probable (kappa: 0.83 [p < .001]) and highly probable or probable (kappa: 0.82 [p < .001]) diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia was very good. RT-PCR tests performed in 307 patients were positive in 173 and negative in 134. Sixteen patients with negative RT-PCR tests and probable or highly probable CT patterns according to both radiologists were reclassified COVID-19 positive after clinical discussion. The areas under the curve (AUC) were 0.94 and 0.92 respectively. With a disease prevalence of 61.6%, PPV were 96.6 % and 94.4%, and NPV 84.3% and 78.2%.Conclusion :During acute COVID-19 outbreak, chest CT scan may be used for triage of patients with intermediate clinical probability with very good inter-observer agreements and diagnostic accuracy.

Cancer surgery during the COVID‐19 pandemic: The experience of a comprehensive cancer center performing preoperative screening by RT‐PCR and chest CT scan

2021 ◽  
Vol 123 (4) ◽  
pp. 815-822
Author(s):  
Joanne Guerlain ◽  
Fabienne Haroun ◽  
Alexandra Voicu ◽  
Charles Honoré ◽  
Franck Griscelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ct Scan ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Preoperative Screening ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

scholarly journals Role of the Bronchoalveolar Lavage in Noncritically Ill Patients during the SARS-CoV-2 Epidemic

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Olivier Taton ◽  
Emmanuelle Papleux ◽  
Benjamin Bondue ◽  
Christiane Knoop ◽  
Sébastien Van Laethem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Bronchoalveolar Lavage ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Care Staff ◽  
Immunocompromised Patients ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

Background. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is currently not recommended in noncritically ill patients for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Indeed, the diagnosis is based on the RT-PCR test on a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and abnormal findings on the chest CT scan. However, the sensitivity of the NPS and the specificity of the chest CT scan are low. Results of BAL in case of negative NPS testing are underreported, especially in the subgroup of immunocompromised patients. Objectives. The added value of BAL in the management of unstable, but noncritically ill patients, suspected of having SARS-CoV-2 infection despite one previous negative NPS and the side effects of the procedure for the patients and the health-care providers, were assessed during the epidemic peak of the COVID-19 outbreak in Belgium. Methods. This multicentric study included all consecutive noncritically ill patients hospitalized with a clinical and radiological suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection but with a negative NPS. BAL was performed according to a predefined decisional algorithm based on their state of immunocompetence, the chest CT scan features, and their respiratory status. Results. Among the 55 patients included in the study, 14 patients were diagnosed with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Interestingly, there was a relationship between the cycle threshold of the RT-PCR and the interval of time between the symptom onset and the BAL procedure ( Pearso n ’ s   correlation   coefficient = 0.8 , p = 0.0004 ). Therapeutic management was changed in 33 patients because another infectious agent was identified in 23 patients or because an alternative diagnosis was made in 10 patients. In immunocompromised patients, the impact of BAL was even more marked (change in therapy for 13/17 patients). No significant adverse event was noted for patients or health-care staff. All health-care workers remained negative for SARS-CoV-2 NPS and serology at the end of the study. Conclusions. In this real-life study, BAL can be performed safely in selected noncritically ill patients suspected of SARS-CoV-2 infection, providing significant clinical benefits that outweigh the risks.

Ultrasound Detection of Pneumothorax Compared with Chest X-Ray and Computed Tomography Scan

2011 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 480-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khanjan Nagarsheth ◽  
Stanley Kurek
Keyword(s):  
Ct Scan ◽  
Negative Predictive Value ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Thoracic Ultrasound ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

Pneumothorax after trauma can be a life threatening injury and its care requires expeditious and accurate diagnosis and possible intervention. We performed a prospective, single blinded study with convenience sampling at a Level I trauma center comparing thoracic ultrasound with chest X-ray and CT scan in the detection of traumatic pneumothorax. Trauma patients that received a thoracic ultrasound, chest X-ray, and chest CT scan were included in the study. The chest X-rays were read by a radiologist who was blinded to the thoracic ultrasound results. Then both were compared with CT scan results. One hundred and twenty-five patients had a thoracic ultrasound performed in the 24-month period. Forty-six patients were excluded from the study due to lack of either a chest X-ray or chest CT scan. Of the remaining 79 patients there were 22 positive pneumothorax found by CT and of those 18 (82%) were found on ultrasound and 7 (32%) were found on chest X-ray. The sensitivity of thoracic ultrasound was found to be 81.8 per cent and the specificity was found to be 100 per cent. The sensitivity of chest X-ray was found to be 31.8 per cent and again the specificity was found to be 100 per cent. The negative predictive value of thoracic ultrasound for pneumothorax was 0.934 and the negative predictive value for chest X-ray for pneumothorax was found to be 0.792. We advocate the use of chest ultrasound for detection of pneumothorax in trauma patients.

scholarly journals Diagnostic Performance of Chest CT-Scan and First RT-PCR Testing for COVID-19 in Iranian Population

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramin Hamidi Farahani ◽  
Meysam Mosallaei ◽  
Ebrahim Hazrati ◽  
Naeim Ehtesham ◽  
Bahram Pakzad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ct Scan ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Iranian Population ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

The article's abstract is not available.  

scholarly journals Evaluation of Chest CT Scan as a Screening and Diagnostic Tool in Trauma Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Cross-Sectional Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Hossein Abdolrahimzadeh Fard ◽  
Salahaddin Mahmudi-Azer ◽  
Sepideh Sefidbakht ◽  
Pooya Iranpour ◽  
Shahram Bolandparvaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ct Scan ◽  
Negative Predictive Value ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Ct Scanner ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

Background. The lack of enough medical evidence about COVID-19 regarding optimal prevention, diagnosis, and treatment contributes negatively to the rapid increase in the number of cases globally. A chest computerized tomography (CT) scan has been introduced as the most sensitive diagnostic method. Therefore, this research aimed to examine and evaluate the chest CT  scan as a screening measure of COVID-19 in trauma patients. Methods. This cross-sectional study was conducted in Rajaee Hospital in Shiraz from February to May 2020. All patients underwent unenhanced CT with a 16-slice CT scanner. The CT scans were evaluated in a blinded manner, and the main CT scan features were described and classified into four groups according to RSNA recommendation. Subsequently, the first two Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) categories with the highest probability of COVID-19 pneumonia (i.e., typical and indeterminate) were merged into the “positive CT scan group” and those with radiologic features with the least probability of COVID-19 pneumonia into “negative CT scan group.” Results. Chest CT scan had a sensitivity of 68%, specificity of 56%, positive predictive value of 34.8%, negative predictive value of 83.7%, and accuracy of 59.3% in detecting COVID-19 among trauma patients. Moreover, for the diagnosis of COVID-19 by CT scan in asymptomatic individuals, a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 66.7%, and negative predictive value of 100% were obtained ( p value: 0.05). Conclusion. Findings of the study indicated that the CT scan’s sensitivity and specificity is less effective in diagnosing trauma patients with COVID-19 compared with nontraumatic people.

scholarly journals Agreement between low-dose and ultra-low-dose chest CT for the diagnosis of viral pneumonia imaging patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic

2022 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hooman Bahrami-Motlagh ◽  
Yashar Moharamzad ◽  
Golnaz Izadi Amoli ◽  
Sahar Abbasi ◽  
Alireza Abrishami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Ground Glass Opacity ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Viral Pneumonia ◽  
Ct Scans ◽  
Low Dose Ct ◽  
Chest Ct Scan

Abstract Background Chest CT scan has an important role in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19 infection. A major concern in radiologic assessment of the patients is the radiation dose. Research has been done to evaluate low-dose chest CT in the diagnosis of pulmonary lesions with promising findings. We decided to determine diagnostic performance of ultra-low-dose chest CT in comparison to low-dose CT for viral pneumonia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results 167 patients underwent both low-dose and ultra-low-dose chest CT scans. Two radiologists blinded to the diagnosis independently examined ultra-low-dose chest CT scans for findings consistent with COVID-19 pneumonia. In case of any disagreement, a third senior radiologist made the final diagnosis. Agreement between two CT protocols regarding ground-glass opacity, consolidation, reticulation, and nodular infiltration were recorded. On low-dose chest CT, 44 patients had findings consistent with COVID-19 infection. Ultra-low-dose chest CT had sensitivity and specificity values of 100% and 98.4%, respectively for diagnosis of viral pneumonia. Two patients were falsely categorized to have pneumonia on ultra-low-dose CT scan. Positive predictive value and negative predictive value of ultra-low-dose CT scan were respectively 95.7% and 100%. There was good agreement between low-dose and ultra-low-dose methods (kappa = 0.97; P < 0.001). Perfect agreement between low-dose and ultra-low-dose scans was found regarding diagnosis of ground-glass opacity (kappa = 0.83, P < 0.001), consolidation (kappa = 0.88, P < 0.001), reticulation (kappa = 0.82, P < 0.001), and nodular infiltration (kappa = 0.87, P < 0.001). Conclusion Ultra-low-dose chest CT scan is comparable to low-dose chest CT for detection of lung infiltration during the COVID-19 outbreak while maintaining less radiation dose. It can also be used instead of low-dose chest CT scan for patient triage in circumstances where rapid-abundant PCR tests are not available.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document