Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Br J Radiol ; 94(1119): 20201039, 2021 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-999784

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of CT and initial reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for detecting COVID-19 infection. METHODS: We searched three databases, PubMed, EMBASE, and EMCARE, to identify studies reporting diagnostic accuracy of both CT and RT-PCR in detecting COVID-19 infection between December 2019 and May 2020. For accurate comparison, only those studies that had patients undergoing both CT and RT-PCR were included. Pooled diagnostic accuracy of both the tests was calculated by using a bivariate random effects model. RESULTS: Based on inclusion criteria, only 11 studies consisting of 1834 patients were included in the final analysis that reported diagnostic accuracy of both CT and RT-PCR, in the same set of patients. Sensitivity estimates for CT scan ranged from 0.69 to 1.00 and for RT-PCR varied ranging from 0.47 to 1.00. The pooled estimates of sensitivity for CT and RT-PCR were 0.91 [95% CI (0.84-0.97)] and 0.84 [95% CI (0.71-0.94)], respectively. On subgroup analysis, pooled sensitivity of CT and RT-PCR was 0.95 [95% CI (0.88-0.98)] and 0.91 [95% CI (0.80-0.96), p = o.ooo1]. The pooled specificity of CT and RT-PCR was 0.31 [95% CI (0.035-0.84)] and 1.00 [95% CI (0.96-1.00)]. CONCLUSION: CT is more sensitive than RT-PCR in detecting COVID-19 infection, but has a very low specificity. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Since the results of a CT scan are available quickly, it can be used as an adjunctive initial diagnostic test for patients with a history of positive contact or epidemiological history.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2
2.
BMJ Case Rep ; 13(8)2020 Aug 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-733174

ABSTRACT

We report the case of a bronchial foreign body, following a tracheostomy site swab for SARS-CoV-2, aiming to raise awareness and vigilance. A qualified nurse was performing a routine SARS-CoV-2 swab on a 51-year-old woman, fitted with a tracheostomy in the recent past following a craniotomy. This was part of the discharging protocol to a nursing home. During the sampling, part of the swab stylet snapped and was inadvertently dropped through the tracheostomy site. Initial CT imaging was reported as showing no signs of a foreign body but some inflammatory changes. Bedside flexible endoscopy through the tracheostomy site revealed the swab in a right lobar bronchus. This was subsequently removed by flexible bronchoscopy. This case highlights the need for clear guidance on how samples for SARS-CoV-2 are taken from patients with front of neck airways (laryngectomy/tracheοstomy) and the potential pitfalls involved.


Subject(s)
Bronchi/diagnostic imaging , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Foreign Bodies/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Specimen Handling/instrumentation , Tracheostomy , Betacoronavirus , Bronchi/surgery , Bronchoscopy , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Female , Foreign Bodies/surgery , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Specimen Handling/adverse effects , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL