Dataset Information

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children: a systematic review of imaging findings.

ABSTRACT:

Background

COVID-19 is a novel coronavirus infection that can cause a severe respiratory illness and has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). Because children appear to be less severely affected than adults, their imaging appearances have not been extensively reported.

Objective

To systematically review available literature regarding imaging findings in paediatric cases of COVID-19.

Materials and methods

We searched four databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Google Scholar) for articles describing imaging findings in children with COVID-19. We included all modalities, age <18 years, and foreign language articles, using descriptive statistics to identify patterns and locations of imaging findings, and their association with outcomes.

Results

Twenty-two articles were included, reporting chest imaging findings in 431 children, of whom 421 (97.7%) underwent CT. Criteria for imaging were lacking. At diagnosis, 143/421 (34.0%) had a normal CT. Abnormalities were more common in the lower lobes and were predominantly unilateral. The most common imaging pattern was ground-glass opacification (159/255, 62.4%). None of the studies described lymphadenopathy, while pleural effusions were rare (three cases). Improvement at follow-up CT imaging (3-15 days later) was seen in 29/100 (29%), remained normal in 25/100 (25%) and progressed in 9/100 (9%).

Conclusion

CT chest findings in children with COVID-19 are frequently normal or mild. Lower lobes are predominantly affected by patchy ground-glass opacification. Appearances at follow-up remain normal or improve in the majority of children. Chest CT imaging adds little to the further management of the patient and should be reserved for severe cases or for identifying alternative diagnoses.

SUBMITTER: Shelmerdine SC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7300372 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the key imaging manifestations of COVID-19 on chest CT in adult patients by providing a comprehensive review of the published literature. METHODS:We performed a systematic literature search from the PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and WHO databases for studies mentioning the chest CT imaging findings of adult COVID-19 patients. RESULTS:A total of 45 studies comprising 4410 patients were included. Ground glass opacities (GGO), in isolation (50.2%) or coexisting with consolidations (44.2%), were the most common lesions. Distribution of GGOs was most commonly bilateral, peripheral/subpleural, and posterior with predilection for lower lobes. Common ancillary findings included pulmonary vascular enlargement (64%), intralobular septal thickening (60%), adjacent pleural thickening (41.7%), air bronchograms (41.2%), subpleural lines, crazy paving, bronchus distortion, bronchiectasis, and interlobular septal thickening. CT in early follow-up period generally showed an increase in size, number, and density of GGOs, with progression into mixed areas of GGOs plus consolidations and crazy paving, peaking at 10-11 days, before gradually resolving or persisting as patchy fibrosis. While younger adults more commonly had GGOs, extensive/multilobar involvement with consolidations was prevalent in the older population and those with severe disease. CONCLUSION:This review describes the imaging features for diagnosis, stratification, and follow-up of COVID-19 patients. The most common CT manifestations are bilateral, peripheral/subpleural, posterior GGOs with or without consolidations with a lower lobe predominance. It is pertinent to be familiar with the various imaging findings to positively impact the management of these patients. KEY POINTS:• Ground glass opacities (GGOs), whether isolated or coexisting with consolidations, in bilateral and subpleural distribution, are the most prevalent chest CT findings in adult COVID-19 patients. • Follow-up CT shows a progression of GGOs into a mixed pattern, reaching a peak at 10-11 days, before gradually resolving or persisting as patchy fibrosis. • Younger people tend to have more GGOs. Older or sicker people tend to have more extensive involvement with consolidations.

Project description:Objective:Clinical and laboratory biomarkers to predict the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are essential in this pandemic situation of which resource allocation must be urgently prepared especially in the context of respiratory support readiness. Lymphocyte count has been a marker of interest since the first COVID-19 publication. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in order to investigate the association of lymphocyte count on admission and the severity of COVID-19. We would also like to analyze whether patient characteristics such as age and comorbidities affect the relationship between lymphocyte count and COVID-19. Methods:Comprehensive and systematic literature search was performed from PubMed, SCOPUS, EuropePMC, ProQuest, Cochrane Central Databases, and Google Scholar. Research articles in adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 with information on lymphocyte count and several outcomes of interest, including mortality, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), intensive care unit (ICU) care, and severe COVID-19, were included in the analysis. Inverse variance method was used to obtain mean differences and its standard deviations. Maentel-Haenszel formula was used to calculate dichotomous variables to obtain odds ratios (ORs) along with its 95% confidence intervals. Random-effect models were used for meta-analysis regardless of heterogeneity. Restricted-maximum likelihood random-effects meta-regression was performed for age, gender, cardiac comorbidity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, COPD, and smoking. Results:There were a total of 3099 patients from 24 studies. Meta-analysis showed that patients with poor outcome have a lower lymphocyte count (mean difference - 361.06 μL [- 439.18, - 282.95], p < 0.001; I 2 84%) compared to those with good outcome. Subgroup analysis showed lower lymphocyte count in patients who died (mean difference - 395.35 μL [- 165.64, - 625.07], p < 0.001; I 2 87%), experienced ARDS (mean difference - 377.56 μL [- 271.89, - 483.22], p < 0.001; I 2 0%), received ICU care (mean difference - 376.53 μL [- 682.84, - 70.22], p = 0.02; I 2 89%), and have severe COVID-19 (mean difference - 353.34 μL [- 250.94, - 455.73], p < 0.001; I 2 85%). Lymphopenia was associated with severe COVID-19 (OR 3.70 [2.44, 5.63], p < 0.001; I 2 40%). Meta-regression showed that the association between lymphocyte count and composite poor outcome was affected by age (p = 0.034). Conclusion:This meta-analysis showed that lymphopenia on admission was associated with poor outcome in patients with COVID-19.

Project description:BackgroundSince the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have performed related clinical research. However, systematic reviews of the registered clinical trials are still lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials for COVID-19 to summarize their characteristics.MethodsThis study is based on the PRISMA recommendations in the Cochrane handbook. The Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify registered clinical trials related to COVID-19. The retrieval inception date was February 9, 2020. Two researchers independently selected the literature based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias.ResultsA total of 75 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) for COVID-19 were identified. The majority of clinical trials were sponsored by Chinese hospitals. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and none of the registered clinical trials have been completed; 34 trials were early clinical exploratory trials or in the pre-experiment stage, 13 trials were phase III, and four trials were phase IV. The intervention methods included traditional Chinese medicine in 26 trials, Western medicine in 30 trials, and integrated traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine in 19 trials. The subjects were primarily non-critical adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The median sample size of the trials was 100 (IQR: 60-200), and the median length of the trial periods was 179 d (IQR: 94-366 d). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examinations. Overall, the methodological quality of both the interventional trials and observational studies was low.ConclusionsIntensive clinical trials on the treatment of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be performed in China. However, based on the uncertain methodological quality, small sample size, and long trial duration, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in the near future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for clinical trials of COVID-19 in the future.