Practical clinical and radiological models to diagnose COVID-19 based on a multicentric teleradiological emergency chest CT cohort.

Our aim was to develop practical models built with simple clinical and radiological features to help diagnosing Coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] in a real-life emergency cohort. To do so, 513 consecutive adult patients suspected of having COVID-19 from 15 emergency departments from 2020-03-13 to 2020-04-14 were included as long as chest CT-scans and real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results were available (244 [47.6%] with a positive RT-PCR). Immediately after their acquisition, the chest CTs were prospectively interpreted by on-call teleradiologists (OCTRs) and systematically reviewed within one week by another senior teleradiologist. Each OCTR reading was concluded using a 5-point scale: normal, non-infectious, infectious non-COVID-19, indeterminate and highly suspicious of COVID-19. The senior reading reported the lesions' semiology, distribution, extent and differential diagnoses. After pre-filtering clinical and radiological features through univariate Chi-2, Fisher or Student t-tests (as appropriate), multivariate stepwise logistic regression (Step-LR) and classification tree (CART) models to predict a positive RT-PCR were trained on 412 patients, validated on an independent cohort of 101 patients and compared with the OCTR performances (295 and 71 with available clinical data, respectively) through area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUC). Regarding models elaborated on radiological variables alone, best performances were reached with the CART model (i.e., AUC = 0.92 [versus 0.88 for OCTR], sensitivity = 0.77, specificity = 0.94) while step-LR provided the highest AUC with clinical-radiological variables (AUC = 0.93 [versus 0.86 for OCTR], sensitivity = 0.82, specificity = 0.91). Hence, these two simple models, depending on the availability of clinical data, provided high performances to diagnose positive RT-PCR and could be used by any radiologist to support, modulate and communicate their conclusion in case of COVID-19 suspicion. Practically, using clinical and radiological variables (GGO, fever, presence of fibrotic bands, presence of diffuse lesions, predominant peripheral distribution) can accurately predict RT-PCR status.

Teleradiology as a relevant indicator of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic management on emergency room activities: a nationwide worrisome survey.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of COVID-19's lockdown on radiological examinations in emergency services. METHODS: Retrospective, multicentre analysis of radiological examinations requested, via our teleradiology network, from 2017 to 2020 during two timeframes (calendar weeks 5-8 and then 12-15). We included CT scans or MRIs performed for strokes, multiple traumas (Body-CT), cranial traumas (CTr) and acute non-traumatic abdominal pain (ANTAP). We evaluated the number and percentages of examinations performed, of those with a pathological conclusion, and of examinations involving the chest. RESULTS: Our study included 25 centres in 2017, 29 in 2018, 43 in 2019 and 59 in 2020. From 2017 to 2019, the percentages of examinations were constant, which was also true for chest CTs. Each centre's number of examinations, gender distribution and patient ages were unchanged. In 2020, examinations significantly decreased: suspected strokes decreased by 36% (1052 vs 675, p < 0.001), Body-CT by 62% (349 vs 134, p < 0.001), CTr by 52% (1853 vs 895, p < 0.001) and for ANTAP, appendicitis decreased by 38% (45 vs 90, not statistically significant (NS)) sigmoiditis by 44% (98 vs 55, NS), and renal colic by 23% (376 vs 288, NS). The number of examinations per centre decreased by 13% (185.5 vs 162.5, p < 0.001), whereas the number of examinations of the "chest" region increased by 170% (1205 vs 3766, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Teleradiology enabled us to monitor the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic management on emergency activities, showing a global decrease in the population's use of care.

The accuracy of teleradiologists in diagnosing COVID-19 based on a French multicentric emergency cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of diagnoses of COVID-19 based on chest CT as well as inter-observer agreement between teleradiologists during on-call duty and senior radiologists in suspected COVID-19 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 13, 2020, to April 14, 2020, consecutive suspected COVID-19 adult patients who underwent both an RT-PCR test and chest CT from 15 hospitals were included in this prospective study. Chest CTs were immediately interpreted by the on-call teleradiologist and were systematically blind reviewed by a senior radiologist. Readings were categorised using a five-point scale: (1) normal; (2) non-infectious findings; (3) infectious findings but not consistent with COVID-19 infection; (4) consistent with COVID-19 infection; and (5) typical appearance of COVID-19 infection. The diagnostic accuracy of chest CT and inter-observer agreement using the kappa coefficient were evaluated over the study period. RESULTS: In total, 513 patients were enrolled, of whom 244/513 (47.6%) tested positive for RT-PCR. First readings were scored 4 or 5 in 225/244 (92%) RT-PCR+ patients, and between 1 and 3 in 201/269 (74.7%) RT-PCR- patients. The data were highly consistent (weighted kappa = 0.87) and correlated with RT-PCR (p < 0.001, AUC1st-reading = 0.89, AUC2nd-reading = 0.93). The negative predictive value for scores of 4 or 5 was 0.91-0.92, and the PPV for a score of 5 was 0.89-0.96 at the first and second readings, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy was consistent over the study period, irrespective of a variable prevalence rate. CONCLUSION: Chest CT demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy with strong inter-observer agreement between on-call teleradiologists with varying degrees of experience and senior radiologists over the study period. KEY POINTS: • The accuracy of readings by on-call teleradiologists, relative to second readings by senior radiologists, demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.75-0.79, specificity of 0.92-0.97, NPV of 0.80-0.83, and PPV of 0.89-0.96, based on "typical appearance," as predictive of RT-PCR+. • Inter-observer agreement between the first reading in the emergency setting and the second reading by the senior emergency teleradiologist was excellent (weighted kappa = 0.87).