Implementation of a telemedicine geriatric co-evaluation in the emergency department: a prospective pilot study.

  INTRODUCTION: Complex drug management is a common challenge in the treatment of geriatric patients. Pandemic scenarios, such as the current one (COVID-19), call for a reduction of face-to-face meetings, especially for elderly patients. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare the innovative concept of applying telemedical assessment to geriatric patients in the emergency department (ED) with ED standard treatment. The therapeutic recommendations regarding drug management from the two assessments were compared. A special focus was the use of potentially inadequate drugs (PIMs) for geriatric patients according to the “Fit for the Aged” (FORTA) classification. METHODS: 50 patients (40% female) aged ≥70 years and assessed with an Identification of Seniors at Risk Score (ISAR score) of ≥2 admitted to the ED were prospectively enrolled in this study between November 2017 and February 2018. In addition to the standard treatment in the ED, co-evaluation via video transmission was independently carried out by a board-certified geriatrician. Drug recommendations by ED physicians (A) and the geriatrician (B) were compared. RESULTS: There was a significantly higher frequency of recommendations regarding changes to preexisting medication (p <0.001, n = 50) via geriatric telemedicine in comparison with standard ED treatment. The geriatrician intervened significantly more often than the ED physicians: discontinuation of a drug, p <0.001; start of a new drug, p = 0.004; dose change of a drug, p = 0.001; n = 50). Based on the additional therapy recommendations of the geriatrician, the amount of medication taken by the patient was significantly reduced compared with standard ED treatment (ED assessment t(49) = 0.622 vs geriatrician’s assessment t(49) = 4.165; p <0.001; n = 50). Additionally, the number of PIMs was significantly reduced compared with standard medical treatment (p <0.001). The geriatrician changed 53.9% of the drugs (35/65) whereas the ED physicians changed only 12.3% (8/65). Recommendations for immediate drug therapy, however, were made more frequently by ED physicians (p <0.039, n = 50). DISCUSSION: An early assessment of elderly emergency patients by a geriatrician had a significant impact on the number of drug interventions in the ED. The number of PIMs could be significantly reduced. Whether this also has a positive effect on the further inpatient course needs to be investigated in further prospective studies. The study was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04148027).  .

Possible Alterations of Imaging Patterns in Computed Tomography for Delta-VOC of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: So far, typical findings for COVID-19 in computed tomography (CT) have been described as bilateral, multifocal ground glass opacities (GGOs) and consolidations, as well as intralobular and interlobular septal thickening. On the contrary, round consolidations with the halo sign are considered uncommon and are typically found in fungal infections, such as invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. The authors recently observed several patients with COVID-19 pneumonia presenting with round, multifocal consolidations accompanied by a halo sign. As this may indicate alterations of CT morphology based on the virus variant, the aim of this study was to investigate this matter in more detail. METHODS: 161 CT scans of patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (RT-PCR within 2 days of CT) examined between January 2021 and September 15, 2021 were included. Follow-up examinations, patients with invasive ventilation at the time of CT, and patients with insufficient virus typing for variants of concern (VOC) were excluded. CT scans were assessed for vertical and axial distribution of pulmonary patterns, degree of involvement, uni- vs. bilaterality, reticulations, and other common findings. The mean density of representative lesions was assessed in Hounsfield units. Results were compared using Mann-Whitney U-tests, Student's t-rests, descriptive statistics, and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: 75 patients did not meet the inclusion criteria. Therefore, 86/161 CT scans of unique patients were analyzed. PCR VOC testing confirmed manifestation of the Delta-VOC SARS-CoV-2 in 22 patients, 39 patients with Alpha-VOC and the remaining 25 patients with Non-VOC SARS-CoV-2 infections. Three patients with the Delta-VOC demonstrated multiple pulmonary masses or nodules with surrounding halo sign, whereas no patients with either Alpha-VOC (p = 0.043) or non-VOC (p = 0.095) demonstrated these findings. All three patients were admitted to normal wards and had no suspicion of a pulmonary co-infection. Patients with Delta-VOC were less likely to have ground glass opacities compared to Alpha-VOC (7/22 or 31.8 % vs. 4/39 or 10.3 %; p < 0.001), whereas a significant difference has not been observed between Delta-VOC and non-VOC (5/25 or 20 %; p = 0.348). The mean representative density of lesions did not show significant differences between the studied cohorts. CONCLUSION: In this study 3 out of 22 patients (13.6 %) with Delta-VOC presented with bilateral round pulmonary masses or nodules with surrounding halo signs, which has not been established as a notable imaging pattern in COVID-19 pneumonia yet. Compared to the other cohorts, a lesser percentage of patients with Delta-VOC presented with ground glass opacities. Based on these results Delta-VOC might cause a divergence in CT-morphologic phenotype. KEY POINTS: · Until recently, CT-morphologic signs of COVID-19 pneumonia have been presumed to be uncontroversially understood. Yet, recently the authors observed diverging pulmonary alterations in patients infected with Delta-VOC.. · These imaging alterations included round pulmonary masses or nodules with surrounding halo sign.. · These imaging alterations have not yet been established as typical for COVID-19 pneumonia, yet.. · Based on these results, Delta-VOC could impose a divergence of CT-morphologic phenotype.. CITATION FORMAT: · Yüksel C, Sähn M, Kleines M et al. Possible Alterations of Imaging Patterns in Computed Tomography for Delta-VOC of SARS-CoV-2 . Fortschr Röntgenstr 2022; 194: 1229 - 1241.

Accuracy of Chest CT for Differentiating COVID-19 from COVID-19 Mimics.

PURPOSE: To determine the performance of radiologists with different levels of expertise regarding the differentiation of COVID-19 from other atypical pneumonias. Chest CT to identify patients suffering from COVID-19 has been reported to be limited by its low specificity for distinguishing COVID-19 from other atypical pneumonias ("COVID-19 mimics"). Meanwhile, the understanding of the morphologic patterns of COVID-19 has improved and they appear to be fairly specific. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 02/2020 and 04/2020, 60 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia underwent chest CT in our department. Cases were matched with a comparable control group of 60 patients of similar age, sex, and comorbidities, who underwent chest CT prior to 01/2020 for atypical pneumonia caused by other pathogens. Included were other viral, fungal, and bacterial pathogens. All 120 cases were blinded to patient history and were reviewed independently by two radiologists and two radiology residents. Readers rated the probability of COVID-19 pneumonia according to the COV-RADS classification system. Results were analyzed using Clopper-Pearson 95 % confidence intervals, Youden's Index for test quality criteria, and Fleiss' kappa statistics. RESULTS: Overall, readers were able to correctly identify the presence of COVID-19 pneumonia in 219/240 (sensitivity: 91 %; 95 %-CI; 86.9 %-94.5 %), and to correctly attribute CT findings to COVID-19 mimics in 159/240 ratings (specificity: 66.3 %; 59.9 %-72.2 %), yielding an overall diagnostic accuracy of 78.8 % (378/480; 74.8 %-82.3 %). Individual reader accuracy ranged from 74.2 % (89/120) to 84.2 % (101/120) and did not correlate significantly with reader expertise. Youden's Index was 0.57. Between-reader agreement was moderate (κ = 0.53). CONCLUSION: In this enriched cohort, radiologists were able to distinguish COVID-19 from "COVID-19 mimics" with moderate diagnostic accuracy. Accuracy did not correlate with reader expertise. KEY POINTS: · In a scenario of direct comparison (no negative findings), CT allows the differentiation of COVID-19 from other atypical pneumonias ("COVID mimics") with moderate accuracy.. · Reader expertise did not significantly influence these results.. · Despite similar patterns and distributions of pulmonary findings, radiologists were able to estimate the probability of COVID-19 pneumonia using the COV-RADS classification in a standardized manner in the larger proportion of cases.. CITATION FORMAT: · Sähn M, Yüksel C, Keil S et al. Accuracy of Chest CT for Differentiating COVID-19 from COVID-19 Mimics. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2021; 193: 1081 - 1091.

Low-Dose Chest CT for the Diagnosis of COVID-19­A Systematic, Prospective Comparison With PCR

BACKGROUND: Only limited evidence has been available to date on the accuracy of systematic low-dose chest computed tomography (LDCT) use in the diagnosis of COVID-19 in patients with non-specific clinical symptoms. METHODS: The COVID-19 Imaging Registry Study Aachen (COVID-19-Bildgebungs-Register Aachen, COBRA) collects data on imaging in patients with COVID-19. Two of the COBRA partner hospitals (RWTH Aachen University Hospital and Dueren Hospital) systematically perform reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from nasopharyngeal swabs as well as LDCT in all patients presenting with manifestations that are compatible with COVID-19. In accordance with the COV-RADS protocol, the LDCT scans were prospectively evaluated before the RT-PCR findings were available in order to categorize the likelihood of COVID-19. RESULTS: From 18 March to 5 May 2020, 191 patients with COVID-19 manifestations (117 male, age 65 ± 16 years) underwent RT-PCR testing and LDCT. The mean time from the submission of the sample to the availability of the RT-PCR findings was 491 minutes (interquartile range [IQR: 276-1066]), while that from the performance of the CT to the availability of its findings was 9 minutes (IQR: 6-11). A diagnosis of COVID-19 was made in 75/191 patients (39%). The LDCT was positive in 71 of these 75 patients and negative in 106 of the 116 patients without COVID-19, corresponding to 94.7% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [86.9; 98.5]), 91.4% specificity [84.7; 95.8], positive and negative predictive values of 87.7% [78.5; 93.9] and 96.4% [91.1; 98.6], respectively, and an AUC (area under the curve) of 0.959 [0.930; 0.988]. The initial RT-PCR test results were falsely negative in six patients, yielding a sensitivity of 92.0% [83.4; 97.0]; these six patients had positive LDCT findings. 47.4% of the LDCTs that were negative for COVID-19 (55/116) exhibited pathological pulmonary changes, including infiltrates, that were correctly distinguished from SARS-CoV-2 related changes. CONCLUSION: In patients with symptoms compatible with COVID-19, LDCT can esablish the diagnosis of COVID-19 with comparable sensitivity to RT-PCR testing. In addition, it offers a high specificity for distinguishing COVID-19 from other diseases associated with the same or similar clinical symptoms. We propose the systematic use of LDCT in addition to RT-PCR testing because it helps correct false-negative RT-PCR results, because its results are available much faster than those of RT-PCRtesting, and because it provides additional diagnostic information useful for treatment planning regardless of the type of the infectious agent.

The Characteristics of 50 Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients With and Without ARDS.

BACKGROUND: The type of pneumonia (coronavirus disease 2019, COVID-19) that is caused by the new coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, SARS-CoV-2) is now spreading across the world in a pandemic. Many patients with COVID-19 were admitted to the University Hospital Aachen during an outbreak that first struck the Heinsberg district in February 2020. METHODS: A comparative presentation of the clinical features of the first 50 COVID-19 patients with and without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who were hospitalized in the University Hospital Aachen. RESULTS: 24 intubated patients were treated in the intensive care unit for ARDS of varying degrees of severity, while 26 patients who were breathing spontaneously without ARDS, but nevertheless needed supplemental oxygen, were treated in a separate isolation ward. The median age of the patients was 65 (IQR 58-76). The median latency from symptom onset to hospitalization was four days (IQR 1-8). Patients with ARDS had preexisting respiratory diseases more commonly than patients without ARDS (58% [95% confidence interval: 39; 76] versus 42% [26; 61]) and were more commonly overweight or obese (83% [64; 93] versus 42% [26; 61]). The two groups did not differ in viral burden but displayed significant differences in laboratory findings: ARDS patients had persistently elevated values for leukocytes, interleukin-6, lactate dehydrogenase, creatine kinase, and D-dimers over the period of observation. Patients without ARDS had persistently elevated inflammatory parameters and fever for at least one week, with an accompanying need for supplemental oxygen. Three of the patients with ARDS died of multiorgan failure, while four in the non-ARDS group died of respiratory insufficiency. CONCLUSION: This initial description of a cohort of COVID-19 patients with and without ARDS in Germany reveals that those with ARDS more commonly have preexisting respiratory diseases and obesity, as well as persistently elevated inflammatory markers. COVID-19 patients without ARDS may likewise require prolonged hospitalization because of persistently elevated inflammatory values with a simultaneous need for supplemental oxygen.