Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Añadir filtros

Base de datos
Asunto principal
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año
1.
Clin Med Res ; 21(1): 14-25, 2023 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2317722

RESUMEN

Objective: We evaluated the triage and prognostic performance of seven proposed computed tomography (CT)-severity score (CTSS) systems in two different age groups.Design: Retrospective study.Setting: COVID-19 pandemic.Participants: Admitted COVID-19, PCR-positive patients were included, excluding patients with heart failure and significant pre-existing pulmonary disease.Methods: Patients were divided into two age groups: ≥65 years and ≤64 years. Clinical data indicating disease severity at presentation and at peak disease severity were recorded. Initial CT images were scored by two radiologists according to seven CTSSs (CTSS1-CTSS7). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for the performance of each CTSS in diagnosing severe/critical disease on admission (triage performance) and at peak disease severity (prognostic performance) was done for the whole cohort and each age group separately.Results: Included were 96 patients. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between the two radiologists scoring the CT scan images were good for all the CTSSs (ICC=0.764-0.837). In the whole cohort, all CTSSs showed an unsatisfactory area under the curve (AUC) in the ROC curve for triage, excluding CTSS2 (AUC=0.700), and all CTSSs showed acceptable AUCs for prognostic usage (0.759-0.781). In the older group (≥65 years; n=55), all CTSSs excluding CTSS6 showed excellent AUCs for triage (0.804-0.830), and CTSS6 was acceptable (AUC=0.796); all CTSSs showed excellent or outstanding AUCs for prognostication (0.859-0.919). In the younger group (≤64 years; n=41), all CTSSs showed unsatisfactory AUCs for triage (AUC=0.487-0.565) and prognostic usage (AUC=0.668-0.694), excluding CTSS6, showing marginally acceptable AUC for prognostic performance (0.700).Conclusion: Those CTSSs requiring more numerous segmentations, namely CTSS2, CTSS7, and CTSS5 showed the best ICCs; therefore, they are the best when comparison between two separate scores is needed. Irrespective of patients' age, CTSSs show minimal value in triage and acceptable prognostic value in COVID-19 patients. CTSS performance is highly variable in different age groups. It is excellent in those aged ≥65 years, but has little if any value in younger patients. Multicenter studies with larger sample size to evaluate results of this study should be conducted.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Anciano , COVID-19/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Retrospectivos , Triaje/métodos , Pronóstico , Pandemias , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos
2.
Caspian J Intern Med ; 13(Suppl 3): 228-235, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1856536

RESUMEN

Background: lung involvement in COVID-19 can be quantified by chest CT scan. We evaluated the triage and prognostication performance of seven proposed CT-severity score (CTSS) systems in two age groups of ≥65 and <65 years old. Methods: Confirmed COVID-19 patients by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) admitted from February 20th, 2020 to July 22nd were included in a retrospective single center study. Clinical disease severity at presentation and at peak disease severity were recorded. CT images were scored according to seven different scoring systems (CTSS1-CTSS7). The cohort was divided into two age groups of ≥65 and <65 years old. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves for each age group for diagnosis of severe/critical disease on admission (for triage) were plotted. Such curves were also plotted for predicting severe/critical disease at peak disease severity (for prognostication), and critical disease at peak severity (for prognostication). Areas under the curve (AUCs), best thresholds, and corresponding sensitivities (Sens.) and specificities (Spec.) were calculated. Results: 96 patients were included with a mean age of 63.6±17.4 years. All CTSSs in 65-year-old or more group (N=55) showed excellent performance (AUC=0.80-0.83, Sens.+Spec.= 155-162%) in triage and excellent or outstanding performance (AUC=0.81-0.92, Sens.+Spec.= 153-177%) in prognostication. In the younger group (N=44), all CTSSs were unsatisfactory for triage (AUC=0.49-0.57) and predicting severe/critical disease (AUC=0.67-0.70), but were acceptable for predicting critical disease (AUC=0.70-0.73, Sens.+Spec.= 132-151%). Conclusion: CTSS is an excellent tool in triage and prognostication in patients with COVID-19 ≥65 years old, but is of limited value in younger patients.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA