Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 12(8)2022 Jul 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1969133

ABSTRACT

Prone positioning is frequently used for non-intubated hypoxemic patients with COVID-19, although conclusive evidence is still lacking. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether baseline CT-scans could predict the improvement in oxygenation in COVID-19 related Acute respira-tory syndrome (ARDS) patients when pronated. METHODS: A retrospective study of COVID-19 patients who underwent non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and prone positioning was conducted. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were included. On average, 50% of the overall lung volume was affected by the disease, as observed in the CT-scans, with ground glass opacities (GGOs) and consolidations accounting for 44% and 4%, respectively. The abnormalities were mainly posterior, as demonstrated by posterior/anterior distribution ratios of 1.5 and 4.4 for GGO and consolidation, respectively. The median PaO2/FiO2 ratio during NIV in a supine position (SP1) was 140 [IQR 108-169], which improved by 67% (+98) during prone positioning, on average. Once supine positioning was resumed (SP2), the improvement in oxygenation was maintained in 28 patients (62% of the overall population, categorized as "responders"). We found no significant differences between responders and non-responders in terms of the extent (p = 0.92) and the distribution of parenchymal abnormalities seen in the baseline CT (p = 0.526). CONCLUSION: Despite the lack of a priori estimation of the sample size, considering the absence of any trends in the differences and correlations, we can reasonably conclude that the baseline chest CT-scan does not predict a gas-exchange response in awake prone-positioned patients with COVID-19 related ARDS. Physicians dealing with this category of patients should not rely on the imaging at presentation when evaluating whether to pronate patients.

2.
Respir Med ; 170: 106036, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-380329

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the imaging features of routine admission chest X-ray in patients referred for novel Coronavirus 2019 infection. METHODS: All patients referred to the emergency departments, RT-PCR positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection were evaluated. Demographic and clinical data were recorded. Two radiologists (8 and 15 years of experience) reviewed all the X-ray images and evaluated the following findings: interstitial opacities, alveolar opacities (AO), AO associated with consolidation, consolidation and/or pleural effusion. We stratified patients in groups according to the time interval between symptoms onset (cut-off 5 days) and X-ray imaging and according to age (cut-off 60 years old). Computed tomography was performed in case of a discrepancy between clinical symptoms, laboratory and X-ray findings, and/or suspicion of complications. RESULTS: A total of 468 patients were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Lung lesions primarily manifested as interstitial opacities (71.7%) and AO opacities (60.5%), more frequently bilateral (64.5%) and with a peripheral predominance (62.5%). Patients admitted to the emergency radiology department after 5 days from symptoms onset, more frequently had interstitial and AO opacities, in comparison to those admitted within 5 days, and lung lesions were more frequently bilateral and peripheral. Older patients more frequently presented interstitial and AO opacities in comparison to younger ones. Sixty-eight patients underwent CT that principally showed the presence of ground-glass opacities and consolidations. CONCLUSIONS: The most common X-ray pattern is multifocal and peripheral, associated with interstitial and alveolar opacities. Chest X-ray, compared to CT, can be considered a reliable diagnostic tool, especially in the Emergency setting.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Pleural Effusion , Pneumonia, Viral , Radiography, Thoracic , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Comparative Effectiveness Research , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pleural Effusion/diagnostic imaging , Pleural Effusion/etiology , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/etiology , Radiography, Thoracic/methods , Radiography, Thoracic/statistics & numerical data , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/statistics & numerical data
3.
Eur J Radiol ; 129: 109092, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-378195

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and the imaging features of routine admission chest X-ray in patients suspected for novel Coronavirus 2019 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. METHOD: We retrospectively evaluated clinical and X-ray features in all patients referred to the emergency department for suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 1st and March 13th. A single radiologist with more than 15 years of experience in chest-imaging evaluated the presence and extent of alveolar opacities, reticulations, and/or pleural effusion. The percentage of lung involvement (range <25 % to 75-100 %) was also calculated. We stratified patients in groups according to the time interval between symptoms onset and X-ray imaging (≤ 5 and > 5 days) and according to age (≤ 50 and > 50 years old). RESULTS: A total of 518 patients were enrolled. Overall 314 patients had negative and 204 had positive RT-PCR results. Lung lesions in patients with SARS-Cov2 pneumonia primarily manifested as alveolar and interstitial opacities and were mainly bilateral (60.8 %). Lung abnormalities were more frequent and more severe by symptom duration and by increasing age. The sensitivity and specificity of chest X-ray at admission in the overall cohort were 57 % (95 % CI = 47-67) and 89 % (83-94), respectively. Sensitivity was higher for patients with symptom onset > 5 days compared to ≤ 5 days (76 % [62-87] vs 37 % [24-52]) and in patients > 50 years old compared to ≤ 50 years (59 % [48-69] vs 47 % [23-72]), at the expense of a slightly lower specificity (68 % [45-86] and 82 % [73-89], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Overall chest X-ray sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia was 57 %. Sensitivity was higher when symptoms had started more than 5 days before, at the expense of lesser specificity, while slightly higher in older patients in comparison to younger ones.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Coronavirus Infections/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Diagnostic Tests, Routine/methods , Diagnostic Tests, Routine/standards , Dyspnea/diagnostic imaging , Dyspnea/virology , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Fever/diagnostic imaging , Fever/virology , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Patient Admission/standards , Pleural Effusion/diagnostic imaging , Pleural Effusion/virology , Point-of-Care Testing/standards , Pulmonary Alveoli/diagnostic imaging , Radiography , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Time-to-Treatment , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , X-Rays , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL