Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Jpn J Radiol ; 40(12): 1246-1256, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1906494

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To explore the CT findings and pneumonnia progression pattern of the Alpha and Delta variants of SARS-CoV-2 by comparing them with the pre-existing wild type. METHOD: In this retrospective comparative study, a total of 392 patients with COVID-19 were included: 118 patients with wild type (70 men, 56.8 ± 20.7 years), 137 with Alpha variant (93 men, 49.4 ± 17.0 years), and 137 with Delta variant (94 men, 45.4 ± 12.4). Chest CT evaluation included opacities and repairing changes as well as lesion distribution and laterality. Chest CT severity score was also calculated. These parameters were statistically compared across the variants. RESULTS: Ground glass opacity (GGO) with consolidation and repairing changes were more frequent in the order of Delta variant, Alpha variant, and wild type throughout the disease course. Delta variant showed GGO with consolidation more conspicuously than did the other two on days 1-4 (vs. wild type, Bonferroni corrected p = 0.01; vs. Alpha variant, Bonferroni corrected p = 0.003) and days 5-8 (vs. wild type, Bonferroni corrected p < 0.001; vs. Alpha variant, Bonferroni corrected-p = 0.003). Total lung CT severity scores of Delta variant were higher than those of wild type on days 1-4 and 5-8 (Bonferroni corrected p = 0.01 and Bonferroni corrected p = 0.005, respectively) and that of Alpha variant on days 1-4 (Bonferroni corrected p = 0.002). There was no difference in the CT findings between wild type and Alpha variant. CONCLUSIONS: Pneumonia progression of Delta variant may be more rapid and severe in the early stage than in the other two.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia , Male , Humans , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , SARS-CoV-2 , Retrospective Studies , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
2.
Heliyon ; 7(8): e07743, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1531289

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement of three reporting systems for computed tomography findings in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), namely the COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS), COVID-19 Imaging Reporting and Data System (COVID-RADS), and Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) expert consensus statement, in a low COVID-19 prevalence area. METHOD: This institutional review board approval single-institutional retrospective study included 154 hospitalized patients between April 1 and May 21, 2020; 26 (16.9 %; 63.2 ± 14.1 years, 21 men) and 128 (65.7 ± 16.4 years, 87 men) patients were diagnosed with and without COVID-19 according to reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction results, respectively. Written informed consent was waived due to the retrospective nature of the study. Six radiologists independently classified chest computed tomography images according to each reporting system. The area under receiver operating characteristic curves, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and interobserver agreements were calculated and compared across the systems using paired t-test and kappa analysis. RESULTS: Mean area under receiver operating characteristic curves were as follows: CO-RADS, 0.89 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.90); COVID-RADS, 0.78 (0.75-0.80); and RSNA expert consensus statement, 0.88 (0.86-0.90). Average kappa values across observers were 0.52 (95 % CI: 0.45-0.60), 0.51 (0.41-0.61), and 0.57 (0.49-0.64) for CO-RADS, COVID-RADS, and RSNA expert consensus statement, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were the highest at 0.71, 0.53, 0.72, 0.96, and 0.56 in the CO-RADS; 0.56, 0.31, 0.54, 0.95, and 0.35 in the COVID-RADS; 0.83, 0.49, 0.61, 0.96, and 0.55 in the RSNA expert consensus statement, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The CO-RADS exhibited the highest specificity, positive predictive value, which are especially important in a low-prevalence population, while maintaining high accuracy and negative predictive value, demonstrating the best performance in a low-prevalence population.

3.
Insights Imaging ; 12(1): 155, 2021 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1496216

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed a major public health crisis all over the world. The role of chest imaging, especially computed tomography (CT), has evolved during the pandemic paralleling the accumulation of scientific evidence. In the early stage of the pandemic, the performance of chest imaging for COVID-19 has widely been debated especially in the context of comparison to real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Current evidence is against the use of chest imaging for routine screening of COVID-19 contrary to the initial expectations. It still has an integral role to play, however, in its work up and staging, especially when assessing complications or disease progression. Chest CT is gold standard imaging modality for COVID-19 pneumonia; in some situations, chest X-ray or ultrasound may be an effective alternative. The most important role of radiologists in this context is to be able to identify those patients at greatest risk of imminent clinical decompensation by learning to stratify cases of COVID-19 on the basis of radiologic imaging in the most efficient and timely fashion possible. The present availability of multiple and more refined CT grading systems and classification is now making this task easier and thereby contributing to the recent improvements achieved in COVID-19 treatment and outcomes. In this article, evidence of chest imaging regarding diagnosis, management and monitoring of COVID-19 will be chronologically reviewed.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL