Dataset Information

Chest CT in COVID-19 at the ED: Validation of the COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) and CT Severity Score: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

CT is thought to play a key role in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnostic workup. The possibility of comparing data across different settings depends on the systematic and reproducible manner in which the scans are analyzed and reported. The COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) and the corresponding CT severity score (CTSS) introduced by the Radiological Society of the Netherlands (NVvR) attempt to do so. However, this system has not been externally validated.

Research question

We aimed to prospectively validate the CO-RADS as a COVID-19 diagnostic tool at the ED and to evaluate whether the CTSS is associated with prognosis.

Study design and methods

We conducted a prospective, observational study in two tertiary centers in The Netherlands, between March 19 and May 28, 2020. We consecutively included 741 adult patients at the ED with suspected COVID-19, who received a chest CT and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) PCR (PCR). Diagnostic accuracy measures were calculated for CO-RADS, using PCR as reference. Logistic regression was performed for CTSS in relation to hospital admission, ICU admission, and 30-day mortality.

Results

Seven hundred forty-one patients were included. We found an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.91 (CI, 0.89-0.94) for CO-RADS using PCR as reference. The optimal CO-RADS cutoff was 4, with a sensitivity of 89.4% (CI, 84.7-93.0) and specificity of 87.2% (CI, 83.9-89.9). We found a significant association between CTSS and hospital admission, ICU admission, and 30-day mortality; adjusted ORs per point increase in CTSS were 1.19 (CI, 1.09-1.28), 1.23 (1.15-1.32), 1.14 (1.07-1.22), respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficients for CO-RADS and CTSS were 0.94 (0.91-0.96) and 0.82 (0.70-0.90).

Interpretation

Our findings support the use of CO-RADS and CTSS in triage, diagnosis, and management decisions for patients presenting with possible COVID-19 at the ED.

SUBMITTER: Lieveld AWE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7704067 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo compare the diagnostic performance and inter-observer agreement of five different CT chest severity scoring systems for COVID-19 to find the most precise one with the least interpretation time.Methods and materialsThis retrospective study included 85 patients (54 male and 31 female) with PCR-confirmed COVID-19. They underwent CT to assess the severity of pulmonary involvement. Three readers were asked to assess the pulmonary abnormalities and score the severity using five different systems, including chest CT severity score (CT-SS), chest CT score, total severity score (TSS), modified total severity score (m-TSS), and 3-level chest CT severity score. Time consumption on reporting of each system was calculated.ResultsTwo hundred fifty-five observations were reported for each system. There was a statistically significant inter-observer agreement in assessing qualitative lung involvement using the m-TSS and the other four quantitative systems. The ROC curves revealed excellent and very good diagnostic accuracy for all systems when cutoff values for detection severe cases were > 22, > 17, > 12, and > 26 for CT-SS, chest CT score, TSS, and 3-level CT severity score. The AUC was very good (0.86), excellent (0.90), very good (0.89), and very good (0.86), respectively. Chest CT score showed the highest specificity (95.2%) in discrimination of severe cases. Time consumption on reporting was significantly different (< 0.001): CT-SS > 3L-CT-SS > chest CT score > TSS.ConclusionAll chest CT severity scoring systems in this study demonstrated excellent inter-observer agreement and reasonable performance to assess COVID-19 in relation to the clinical severity. CT-SS and TSS had the highest specificity and least time for interpretation.Key points• All chest CT severity scoring systems discussed in this study revealed excellent inter-observer agreement and reasonable performance to assess COVID-19 in relation to the clinical severity. • Chest CT scoring system and TSS had the highest specificity. • Both TSS and m-TSS consumed the least time compared to the other three scoring systems.

Project description:ObjectiveTo develop and test computer software to detect, quantify, and monitor progression of pneumonia associated with COVID-19 using chest CT scans.MethodsOne hundred twenty chest CT scans from subjects with lung infiltrates were used for training deep learning algorithms to segment lung regions and vessels. Seventy-two serial scans from 24 COVID-19 subjects were used to develop and test algorithms to detect and quantify the presence and progression of infiltrates associated with COVID-19. The algorithm included (1) automated lung boundary and vessel segmentation, (2) registration of the lung boundary between serial scans, (3) computerized identification of the pneumonitis regions, and (4) assessment of disease progression. Agreement between radiologist manually delineated regions and computer-detected regions was assessed using the Dice coefficient. Serial scans were registered and used to generate a heatmap visualizing the change between scans. Two radiologists, using a five-point Likert scale, subjectively rated heatmap accuracy in representing progression.ResultsThere was strong agreement between computer detection and the manual delineation of pneumonic regions with a Dice coefficient of 81% (CI 76-86%). In detecting large pneumonia regions (> 200 mm3), the algorithm had a sensitivity of 95% (CI 94-97%) and specificity of 84% (CI 81-86%). Radiologists rated 95% (CI 72 to 99) of heatmaps at least "acceptable" for representing disease progression.ConclusionThe preliminary results suggested the feasibility of using computer software to detect and quantify pneumonic regions associated with COVID-19 and to generate heatmaps that can be used to visualize and assess progression.Key points• Both computer vision and deep learning technology were used to develop computer software to quantify the presence and progression of pneumonia associated with COVID-19 depicted on CT images. • The computer software was tested using both quantitative experiments and subjective assessment. • The computer software has the potential to assist in the detection of the pneumonic regions, monitor disease progression, and assess treatment efficacy related to COVID-19.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:COVID-19 pneumonia is characterized by ground-glass opacities (GGOs) and consolidations on Chest CT, although these CT features cannot be considered specific, at least on a qualitative analysis. The aim is to evaluate if Quantitative Chest CT could provide reliable information in discriminating COVID-19 from non-COVID-19 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS:From March 31, 2020 until April 18, 2020, patients with Chest CT suggestive for interstitial pneumonia were retrospectively enrolled and divided into two groups based on positive/negative COVID-19 RT-PCR results. Patients with pulmonary resection and/or CT motion artifacts were excluded. Quantitative Chest CT analysis was performed with a dedicated software that provides total lung volume, healthy parenchyma, GGOs, consolidations and fibrotic alterations, expressed both in liters and percentage. Two radiologists in consensus revised software analysis and adjusted areas of lung impairment in case of non-adequate segmentation. Data obtained were compared between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients and p?<?0.05 were considered statistically significant. Performance of statistically significant parameters was tested by ROC curve analysis. RESULTS:Final population enrolled included 190 patients: 136 COVID-19 patients (87 male, 49 female, mean age 66?±?16) and 54 non-COVID-19 patients (25 male, 29 female, mean age 63?±?15). Lung quantification in liters showed significant differences between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients for GGOs (0.55?±?0.26L vs 0.43?±?0.23L, p?=?0.0005) and fibrotic alterations (0.05?±?0.03 L vs 0.04?±?0.03 L, p?<?0.0001). ROC analysis of GGOs and fibrotic alterations showed an area under the curve of 0.661 (cutoff 0.39 L, 68% sensitivity and 59% specificity, p?<?0.001) and 0.698 (cutoff 0.02 L, 86% sensitivity and 44% specificity, p?<?0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Quantification of GGOs and fibrotic alterations on Chest CT could be able to identify patients with COVID-19.

Project description:Background The standard for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 virus is reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, but chest CT may play a complimentary role in the early detection of COVID-19 pneumonia. Purpose To investigate CT features of patients with COVID-19 in Rome, Italy, and to compare the accuracy of CT with RT-PCR. Methods In this prospective study from March 4, 2020, until March 19, 2020, consecutive patients with suspected COVID-19 infection and respiratory symptoms were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were: chest CT with contrast medium performed for vascular indications, patients who refused chest CT or hospitalization, and severe CT motion artifact. All patients underwent RT-PCR and chest CT. Diagnostic performance of CT was calculated using RT-PCR as reference. Chest CT features were calculated in a subgroup of RT-PCR-positive and CT-positive patients. CT features of hospitalized patients and patient in home isolation were compared by using Pearson chi squared test. Results Our study population comprised 158 consecutive study participants (83 male and 75 female, mean age 57 y ±17). Fever was observed in 97/158 (61%), cough in 88/158 (56%), dyspnea in 52/158 (33%), lymphocytopenia in 95/158 (60%), increased C-reactive protein level in 139/158 (88%), and elevated lactate dehydrogenase in 128/158 (81%) study participants. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CT were 97% (60/62)[95% IC, 88-99%], 56% (54/96)[95% IC,45-66%] and 72% (114/158)[95% IC 64-78%], respectively. In the subgroup of RT-PCR-positive and CT-positive patients, ground-glass opacities (GGO) were present in 58/58 (100%), multilobe and posterior involvement were both present in 54/58 (93%), bilateral pneumonia in 53/58 (91%), and subsegmental vessel enlargement (> 3 mm) in 52/58 (89%) of study participants. Conclusion The typical pattern of COVID-19 pneumonia in Rome, Italy, was peripherally ground-glass opacities with multilobe and posterior involvement, bilateral distribution, and subsegmental vessel enlargement (> 3 mm). Chest CT sensitivity was high (97%) but with lower specificity (56%).