RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To analyze the vaccine effect by comparing five groups: unvaccinated patients with Alpha variant, unvaccinated patients with Delta variant, vaccinated patients with Delta variant, unvaccinated patients with Omicron variant, and vaccinated patients with Omicron variant, assessing the "gravity" of COVID-19 pulmonary involvement, based on CT findings in critically ill patients admitted to Intensive Care Unit (ICU). METHODS: Patients were selected by ICU database considering the period from December 2021 to 23 March 2022, according to the following inclusion criteria: patients with proven Omicron variant COVID-19 infection with known COVID-19 vaccination with at least two doses and with chest Computed Tomography (CT) study during ICU hospitalization. Wee also evaluated the ICU database considering the period from March 2020 to December 2021, to select unvaccinated consecutive patients with Alpha variant, subjected to CT study, consecutive unvaccinated and vaccinated patients with Delta variant, subjected to CT study, and, consecutive unvaccinated patients with Omicron variant, subjected to CT study. CT images were evaluated qualitatively using a severity score scale of 5 levels (none involvement, mild: ≤25% of involvement, moderate: 26-50% of involvement, severe: 51-75% of involvement, and critical involvement: 76-100%) and quantitatively, using the Philips IntelliSpace Portal clinical application CT COPD computer tool. For each patient the lung volumetry was performed identifying the percentage value of aerated residual lung volume. Non-parametric tests for continuous and categorical variables were performed to assess statistically significant differences among groups. RESULTS: The patient study group was composed of 13 vaccinated patients affected by the Omicron variant (Omicron V). As control groups we identified: 20 unvaccinated patients with Alpha variant (Alpha NV); 20 unvaccinated patients with Delta variant (Delta NV); 18 vaccinated patients with Delta variant (Delta V); and 20 unvaccinated patients affected by the Omicron variant (Omicron NV). No differences between the groups under examination were found (p value > 0.05 at Chi square test) in terms of risk factors (age, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, immunosuppression, chronic kidney, cardiac, pulmonary, neurologic, and liver disease, etc.). A different median value of aerated residual lung volume was observed in the Delta variant groups: median value of aerated residual lung volume was 46.70% in unvaccinated patients compared to 67.10% in vaccinated patients. In addition, in patients with Delta variant every other extracted volume by automatic tool showed a statistically significant difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated group. Statistically significant differences were observed for each extracted volume by automatic tool between unvaccinated patients affected by Alpha variant and vaccinated patients affected by Delta variant of COVID-19. Good statistically significant correlations among volumes extracted by automatic tool for each lung lobe and overall radiological severity score were obtained (ICC range 0.71-0.86). GGO was the main sign of COVID-19 lesions on CT images found in 87 of the 91 (95.6%) patients. No statistically significant differences were observed in CT findings (ground glass opacities (GGO), consolidation or crazy paving sign) among patient groups. CONCLUSION: In our study, we showed that in critically ill patients no difference were observed in terms of severity of disease or exitus, between unvaccinated and vaccinated patients. The only statistically significant differences were observed, with regard to the severity of COVID-19 pulmonary parenchymal involvement, between unvaccinated patients affected by Alpha variant and vaccinated patients affected by Delta variant, and between unvaccinated patients with Delta variant and vaccinated patients with Delta variant.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To investigate two commercial software and their efficacy in the assessment of chest CT sequelae in patients affected by COVID-19 pneumonia, comparing the consistency of tools. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Included in the study group were 120 COVID-19 patients (56 women and 104 men; 61 years of median age; range: 21-93 years) who underwent chest CT examinations at discharge between 5 March 2020 and 15 March 2021 and again at a follow-up time (3 months; range 30-237 days). A qualitative assessment by expert radiologists in the infectious disease field (experience of at least 5 years) was performed, and a quantitative evaluation using thoracic VCAR software (GE Healthcare, Chicago, Illinois, United States) and a pneumonia module of ANKE ASG-340 CT workstation (HTS Med & Anke, Naples, Italy) was performed. The qualitative evaluation included the presence of ground glass opacities (GGOs) consolidation, interlobular septal thickening, fibrotic-like changes (reticular pattern and/or honeycombing), bronchiectasis, air bronchogram, bronchial wall thickening, pulmonary nodules surrounded by GGOs, pleural and pericardial effusion, lymphadenopathy, and emphysema. A quantitative evaluation included the measurements of GGOs, consolidations, emphysema, residual healthy parenchyma, and total lung volumes for the right and left lung. A chi-square test and non-parametric test were utilized to verify the differences between groups. Correlation coefficients were used to analyze the correlation and variability among quantitative measurements by different computer tools. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed. RESULTS: The correlation coefficients showed great variability among the quantitative measurements by different tools when calculated on baseline CT scans and considering all patients. Instead, a good correlation (≥0.6) was obtained for the quantitative GGO, as well as the consolidation volumes obtained by two tools when calculated on baseline CT scans, considering the control group. An excellent correlation (≥0.75) was obtained for the quantitative residual healthy lung parenchyma volume, GGO, consolidation volumes obtained by two tools when calculated on follow-up CT scans, and for residual healthy lung parenchyma and GGO quantification when the percentage change of these volumes were calculated between a baseline and follow-up scan. The highest value of accuracy to identify patients with RT-PCR positive compared to the control group was obtained by a GGO total volume quantification by thoracic VCAR (accuracy = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Computer aided quantification could be an easy and feasible way to assess chest CT sequelae due to COVID-19 pneumonia; however, a great variability among measurements provided by different tools should be considered.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: the purpose of this study was to assess the evolution of computed tomography (CT) findings and lung residue in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, via quantified evaluation of the disease, using a computer aided tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: we retrospectively evaluated 341 CT examinations of 140 patients (68 years of median age) infected with COVID-19 (confirmed by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)), who were hospitalized, and who received clinical and CT examinations. All CTs were evaluated by two expert radiologists, in consensus, at the same reading session, using a computer-aided tool for quantification of the pulmonary disease. The parameters obtained using the computer tool included the healthy residual parenchyma, ground glass opacity, consolidation, and total lung volume. RESULTS: statistically significant differences (p value ≤ 0.05) were found among quantified volumes of healthy residual parenchyma, ground glass opacity (GGO), consolidation, and total lung volume, considering different clinical conditions (stable, improved, and worsened). Statistically significant differences were found among quantified volumes for healthy residual parenchyma, GGO, and consolidation (p value ≤ 0.05) between dead patients and discharged patients. CT was not performed on cadavers; the death was an outcome, which was retrospectively included to differentiate findings of patients who survived vs. patients who died during hospitalization. Among discharged patients, complete disease resolutions on CT scans were observed in 62/129 patients with lung disease involvement ≤5%; lung disease involvement from 5% to 15% was found in 40/129 patients, while 27/129 patients had lung disease involvement between 16 and 30%. Moreover, 8-21 days (after hospital admission) was an "advanced period" with the most severe lung disease involvement. After the extent of involvement started to decrease-particularly after 21 days-the absorption was more obvious. CONCLUSIONS: a complete disease resolution on chest CT scans was observed in 48.1% of discharged patients using a computer-aided tool to quantify the GGO and consolidation volumes; after 16 days of hospital admission, the abnormalities identified by chest CT began to improve; in particular, the absorption was more obvious after 21 days.
RESUMEN
Purpose: To compare different commercial software in the quantification of Pneumonia Lesions in COVID-19 infection and to stratify the patients based on the disease severity using on chest computed tomography (CT) images. Materials and methods: We retrospectively examined 162 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. All cases were evaluated separately by radiologists (visually) and by using three computer software programs: (1) Thoracic VCAR software, GE Healthcare, United States;(2) Myrian, Intrasense, France;(3) InferRead, InferVision Europe, Wiesbaden, Germany. The degree of lesions was visually scored by the radiologist using a score on 5 levels (none, mild, moderate, severe, and critic). The parameters obtained using the computer tools included healthy residual lung parenchyma, ground-glass opacity area, and consolidation volume. Intraclass coefficient (ICC), Spearman correlation analysis, and non-parametric tests were performed. Results: Thoracic VCAR software was not able to perform volumes segmentation in 26/162 (16.0%) cases, Myrian software in 12/162 (7.4%) patients while InferRead software in 61/162 (37.7%) patients. A great variability (ICC ranged for 0.17 to 0.51) was detected among the quantitative measurements of the residual healthy lung parenchyma volume, GGO, and consolidations volumes calculated by different computer tools. The overall radiological severity score was moderately correlated with the residual healthy lung parenchyma volume obtained by ThoracicVCAR or Myrian software, with the GGO area obtained by the ThoracicVCAR tool and with consolidation volume obtained by Myrian software. Quantified volumes by InferRead software had a low correlation with the overall radiological severity score. Conclusions: Computer-aided pneumonia quantification could be an easy and feasible way to stratify COVID-19 cases according to severity;however, a great variability among quantitative measurements provided by computer tools should be considered.