The Usefulness of Chest CT Imaging in Patients With Suspected or Diagnosed COVID-19: A Review of Literature.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had devastating medical and economic consequences globally. The severity of COVID-19 is related, in a large measure, to the extent of pulmonary involvement. The role of chest CT imaging in the management of patients with COVID-19 has evolved since the onset of the pandemic. Specifically, the description of CT scan findings, use of chest CT imaging in various acute and subacute settings, and its usefulness in predicting chronic disease have been defined better. We performed a review of published data on CT scans in patients with COVID-19. A summary of the range of imaging findings, from typical to less common abnormalities, is provided. Familiarity with these findings may facilitate the diagnosis and management of this disease. A comparison of sensitivity and specificity of chest CT imaging with reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction testing highlights the potential role of CT imaging in difficult-to-diagnose cases of COVID-19. The usefulness of CT imaging to assess prognosis, to guide management, and to identify acute pulmonary complications associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection is highlighted. Beyond the acute stage, it is important for clinicians to recognize pulmonary parenchymal abnormalities, progressive fibrotic lung disease, and vascular changes that may be responsible for persistent respiratory symptoms. A large collection of multi-institutional images were included to elucidate the CT scan findings described.

Impact of Timing of Tocilizumab Use in Hospitalized Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) continues to be a global challenge due to the lack of definitive treatment strategies. We sought to determine the efficacy of early administration of anti-interleukin 6 therapy in reducing hospital mortality and progression to mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of 11,512 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 who were admitted to a New York health system from March to May 2020. Tocilizumab was administered to subjects at the nasal cannula level of oxygen support to maintain an oxygen saturation of >88%. The Charlson comorbidity index was used as an objective assessment of the burden of comorbidities to predict 10-year mortality. The primary outcome of interest was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were progression to mechanical ventilation; the prevalence of venous thromboembolism and renal failure; and the change in C-reactive protein, D-dimer, and ferritin levels after tocilizumab administration. Propensity score matching by using a 1:2 protocol was used to match the tocilizumab and non-tocilizumab groups to minimize selection bias. The groups were matched on baseline demographic characteristics, including age, sex, and body mass index; Charlson comorbidity index score; laboratory markers, including ferritin, D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, and C-reactive protein values; and the maximum oxygen requirement at the time of tocilizumab administration. Mortality outcomes were evaluated based on the level of oxygen requirement and the day of hospitalization at the time of tocilizumab administration. RESULTS: The overall hospital mortality was significantly reduced in the tocilizumab group when tocilizumab was administered at the nasal cannula level (10.4% vs 22.0%; P = .002). In subjects who received tocilizumab at the nasal cannula level, the progression to mechanical ventilation was reduced versus subjects who were initially on higher levels of oxygen support (6.3% vs 18.7%; P < .001). There was no improvement in mortality when tocilizumab was given at the time of requiring non-rebreather, high-flow nasal cannula, noninvasive ventilator, or invasive ventilator. CONCLUSIONS: Early use of anti-interleukin 6 therapy may be associated with improved hospital mortality and reduction in progression to more severe coronavirus disease 2019.

Management of Lung Nodules and Lung Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic: CHEST Expert Panel Report.

Background: The risks from potential exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and resource reallocation that has occurred to combat the pandemic, have altered the balance of benefits and harms that informed current (pre-COVID-19) guideline recommendations for lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation. Consensus statements were developed to guide clinicians managing lung cancer screening programs and patients with lung nodules during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: An expert panel of 24 members, including pulmonologists (n = 17), thoracic radiologists (n = 5), and thoracic surgeons (n = 2), was formed. The panel was provided with an overview of current evidence, summarized by recent guidelines related to lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation. The panel was convened by video teleconference to discuss and then vote on statements related to 12 common clinical scenarios. A predefined threshold of 70% of panel members voting agree or strongly agree was used to determine if there was a consensus for each statement. Items that may influence decisions were listed as notes to be considered for each scenario. Results: Twelve statements related to baseline and annual lung cancer screening (n = 2), surveillance of a previously detected lung nodule (n = 5), evaluation of intermediate and high-risk lung nodules (n = 4), and management of clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer (n = 1) were developed and modified. All 12 statements were confirmed as consensus statements according to the voting results. The consensus statements provide guidance about situations in which it was believed to be appropriate to delay screening, defer surveillance imaging of lung nodules, and minimize nonurgent interventions during the evaluation of lung nodules and stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Conclusion: There was consensus that during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is appropriate to defer enrollment in lung cancer screening and modify the evaluation of lung nodules due to the added risks from potential exposure and the need for resource reallocation. There are multiple local, regional, and patient-related factors that should be considered when applying these statements to individual patient care.© 2020 RSNA; The American College of Chest Physicians, published by Elsevier Inc; and The American College of Radiology, published by Elsevier Inc.

Imaging algorithm for COVID-19: A practical approach.

The global pandemic of COVID-19 pneumonia caused by the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has strained healthcare resources across the world with emerging challenges of mass testing, resource allocation and management. While reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test is the most commonly utilized test and considered the current gold standard for diagnosis, the role of chest imaging has been highlighted by several studies demonstrating high sensitivity of computed tomography (CT). Many have suggested using CT chest as a first-line screening tool for the diagnosis of COVID-19. However, with advancement of laboratory testing and challenges in obtaining a CT scan without significant risk to healthcare providers, the role of imaging in diagnosis has been questioned. Several imaging societies have released consensus statements and guidelines on utilizing imaging resources and optimal reporting. In this review, we highlight the current evidence on various modalities in thoracic imaging for the diagnosis of COVID-19 and describe an algorithm on how to use these resources in an optimal fashion in accordance with the guidelines and statements released by major imaging societies.

High-Flow, Noninvasive Ventilation and Awake (Nonintubation) Proning in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 With Respiratory Failure.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic will be remembered for the rapidity with which it spread, the morbidity and mortality associated with it, and the paucity of evidence-based management guidelines. One of the major concerns of hospitals was to limit spread of infection to health-care workers. Because the virus is spread mainly by respiratory droplets and aerosolized particles, procedures that may potentially disperse viral particles, the so-called "aerosol-generating procedures" were avoided whenever possible. Included in this category were noninvasive ventilation (NIV), high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), and awake (nonintubated) proning. Accordingly, at many health-care facilities, patients who had increasing oxygen requirements were emergently intubated and mechanically ventilated to avoid exposure to aerosol-generating procedures. With experience, physicians realized that mortality of invasively ventilated patients was high and it was not easy to extubate many of these patients. This raised the concern that HFNC and NIV were being underutilized to avoid intubation and to facilitate extubation. In this article, we attempt to separate fact from fiction and perception from reality pertaining to the aerosol dispersion with NIV, HFNC, and awake proning. We describe precautions that hospitals and health-care providers must take to mitigate risks with these devices. Finally, we take a practical approach in describing how we use the three techniques, including the common indications, contraindications, and practical aspects of application.

Management of Lung Nodules and Lung Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic: CHEST Expert Panel Report.

BACKGROUND: The risks from potential exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and resource reallocation that has occurred to combat the pandemic, have altered the balance of benefits and harms that informed current (pre-COVID-19) guideline recommendations for lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation. Consensus statements were developed to guide clinicians managing lung cancer screening programs and patients with lung nodules during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: An expert panel of 24 members, including pulmonologists (n = 17), thoracic radiologists (n = 5), and thoracic surgeons (n = 2), was formed. The panel was provided with an overview of current evidence, summarized by recent guidelines related to lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation. The panel was convened by video teleconference to discuss and then vote on statements related to 12 common clinical scenarios. A predefined threshold of 70% of panel members voting agree or strongly agree was used to determine if there was a consensus for each statement. Items that may influence decisions were listed as notes to be considered for each scenario. RESULTS: Twelve statements related to baseline and annual lung cancer screening (n = 2), surveillance of a previously detected lung nodule (n = 5), evaluation of intermediate and high-risk lung nodules (n = 4), and management of clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer (n = 1) were developed and modified. All 12 statements were confirmed as consensus statements according to the voting results. The consensus statements provide guidance about situations in which it was believed to be appropriate to delay screening, defer surveillance imaging of lung nodules, and minimize nonurgent interventions during the evaluation of lung nodules and stage I non-small cell lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: There was consensus that during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is appropriate to defer enrollment in lung cancer screening and modify the evaluation of lung nodules due to the added risks from potential exposure and the need for resource reallocation. There are multiple local, regional, and patient-related factors that should be considered when applying these statements to individual patient care.

The Role of Chest Imaging in Patient Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multinational Consensus Statement from the Fleischner Society.

With more than 900 000 confirmed cases worldwide and nearly 50 000 deaths during the first 3 months of 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has emerged as an unprecedented health care crisis. The spread of COVID-19 has been heterogeneous, resulting in some regions having sporadic transmission and relatively few hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and others having community transmission that has led to overwhelming numbers of severe cases. For these regions, health care delivery has been disrupted and compromised by critical resource constraints in diagnostic testing, hospital beds, ventilators, and health care workers who have fallen ill to the virus exacerbated by shortages of personal protective equipment. Although mild cases mimic common upper respiratory viral infections, respiratory dysfunction becomes the principal source of morbidity and mortality as the disease advances. Thoracic imaging with chest radiography and CT are key tools for pulmonary disease diagnosis and management, but their role in the management of COVID-19 has not been considered within the multivariable context of the severity of respiratory disease, pretest probability, risk factors for disease progression, and critical resource constraints. To address this deficit, a multidisciplinary panel comprised principally of radiologists and pulmonologists from 10 countries with experience managing patients with COVID-19 across a spectrum of health care environments evaluated the utility of imaging within three scenarios representing varying risk factors, community conditions, and resource constraints. Fourteen key questions, corresponding to 11 decision points within the three scenarios and three additional clinical situations, were rated by the panel based on the anticipated value of the information that thoracic imaging would be expected to provide. The results were aggregated, resulting in five main and three additional recommendations intended to guide medical practitioners in the use of chest radiography and CT in the management of COVID-19.

The Role of Chest Imaging in Patient Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multinational Consensus Statement From the Fleischner Society.

With more than 900,000 confirmed cases worldwide and nearly 50,000 deaths during the first 3 months of 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has emerged as an unprecedented health care crisis. The spread of COVID-19 has been heterogeneous, resulting in some regions having sporadic transmission and relatively few hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and others having community transmission that has led to overwhelming numbers of severe cases. For these regions, health care delivery has been disrupted and compromised by critical resource constraints in diagnostic testing, hospital beds, ventilators, and health care workers who have fallen ill to the virus exacerbated by shortages of personal protective equipment. Although mild cases mimic common upper respiratory viral infections, respiratory dysfunction becomes the principal source of morbidity and mortality as the disease advances. Thoracic imaging with chest radiography and CT are key tools for pulmonary disease diagnosis and management, but their role in the management of COVID-19 has not been considered within the multivariable context of the severity of respiratory disease, pretest probability, risk factors for disease progression, and critical resource constraints. To address this deficit, a multidisciplinary panel comprised principally of radiologists and pulmonologists from 10 countries with experience managing patients with COVID-19 across a spectrum of health care environments evaluated the utility of imaging within three scenarios representing varying risk factors, community conditions, and resource constraints. Fourteen key questions, corresponding to 11 decision points within the three scenarios and three additional clinical situations, were rated by the panel based on the anticipated value of the information that thoracic imaging would be expected to provide. The results were aggregated, resulting in five main and three additional recommendations intended to guide medical practitioners in the use of chest radiography and CT in the management of COVID-19.

Management of Lung Nodules and Lung Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic: CHEST Expert Panel Report.

BACKGROUND: The risks from potential exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and resource reallocation that has occurred to combat the pandemic, have altered the balance of benefits and harms that informed current (pre-COVID-19) guideline recommendations for lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation. Consensus statements were developed to guide clinicians managing lung cancer screening programs and patients with lung nodules during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: An expert panel of 24 members, including pulmonologists (n = 17), thoracic radiologists (n = 5), and thoracic surgeons (n = 2), was formed. The panel was provided with an overview of current evidence, summarized by recent guidelines related to lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation. The panel was convened by video teleconference to discuss and then vote on statements related to 12 common clinical scenarios. A predefined threshold of 70% of panel members voting agree or strongly agree was used to determine if there was a consensus for each statement. Items that may influence decisions were listed as notes to be considered for each scenario. RESULTS: Twelve statements related to baseline and annual lung cancer screening (n = 2), surveillance of a previously detected lung nodule (n = 5), evaluation of intermediate and high-risk lung nodules (n = 4), and management of clinical stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 1) were developed and modified. All 12 statements were confirmed as consensus statements according to the voting results. The consensus statements provide guidance about situations in which it was believed to be appropriate to delay screening, defer surveillance imaging of lung nodules, and minimize nonurgent interventions during the evaluation of lung nodules and stage I non-small-cell lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: There was consensus that during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is appropriate to defer enrollment in lung cancer screening and modify the evaluation of lung nodules due to the added risks from potential exposure and the need for resource reallocation. There are multiple local, regional, and patient-related factors that should be considered when applying these statements to individual patient care.