胸部CT诊断COVID-19:使用CO-RADS和CT受累评分的准确性。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q4 Medicine
Brecht Van Berkel, Jan Vandevenne, Kristof Coursier, Vincent Alberts, Jan Van Offenwert, Jan Verduyckt, Martijn Grieten, Wim Siemons, Geert Verswijvel
{"title":"胸部CT诊断COVID-19:使用CO-RADS和CT受累评分的准确性。","authors":"Brecht Van Berkel,&nbsp;Jan Vandevenne,&nbsp;Kristof Coursier,&nbsp;Vincent Alberts,&nbsp;Jan Van Offenwert,&nbsp;Jan Verduyckt,&nbsp;Martijn Grieten,&nbsp;Wim Siemons,&nbsp;Geert Verswijvel","doi":"10.5334/jbsr.2342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Both Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) and CT-involvement scores (CTIS) have been proposed for evaluation of COVID-19 on chest CT. The purpose of this single-center, retrospective study was to evaluate both scoring systems to diagnose COVID-19 infection in a high-prevalence area.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Chest CT datasets (n = 200) and available reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on nasopharyngeal swab were included. CT scans were assigned to four 'imaging groups' after scoring for both CO-RADS and CTIS. Diagnostic accuracy of chest CT was calculated respectively using RT-PCR and clinical diagnosis as gold standards: False-negatives and false-positives of chest CT regarding RT-PCR were studied in more depth using the medical files.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 'imaging group' including CO-RADS 4/5 scores reached the highest diagnostic values for COVID-19 considering either the initial RT-PCR or the final clinical diagnosis as the standard of reference: accuracies of 172/200 (86%) to 181/200 (90.5%), sensitivities of 60/80 (88.2%) to 70/79 (88.6%), specificities of 112/132 (84.9%) to 111/121 (91.7%), negative predictive values (NPV) of 112/120 (93.3%) to 111/120 (92.5%), respectively. False-negative CTs regarding RT-PCR were mainly explained by imaging very early in the disease course (5 out of 8 cases) or COVID-19 infection with no/minor respiratory symptoms (3 out of 8 cases).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Assessing chest CT using CO-RADS is a valuable diagnostic approach for COVID-19 infection in a high-prevalence area, with a higher accuracy than CTIS.</p>","PeriodicalId":56282,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034407/pdf/","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chest CT Diagnosis of COVID-19: Accuracy using CO-RADS and CT-Involvement Scoring.\",\"authors\":\"Brecht Van Berkel,&nbsp;Jan Vandevenne,&nbsp;Kristof Coursier,&nbsp;Vincent Alberts,&nbsp;Jan Van Offenwert,&nbsp;Jan Verduyckt,&nbsp;Martijn Grieten,&nbsp;Wim Siemons,&nbsp;Geert Verswijvel\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/jbsr.2342\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Both Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) and CT-involvement scores (CTIS) have been proposed for evaluation of COVID-19 on chest CT. The purpose of this single-center, retrospective study was to evaluate both scoring systems to diagnose COVID-19 infection in a high-prevalence area.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Chest CT datasets (n = 200) and available reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on nasopharyngeal swab were included. CT scans were assigned to four 'imaging groups' after scoring for both CO-RADS and CTIS. Diagnostic accuracy of chest CT was calculated respectively using RT-PCR and clinical diagnosis as gold standards: False-negatives and false-positives of chest CT regarding RT-PCR were studied in more depth using the medical files.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 'imaging group' including CO-RADS 4/5 scores reached the highest diagnostic values for COVID-19 considering either the initial RT-PCR or the final clinical diagnosis as the standard of reference: accuracies of 172/200 (86%) to 181/200 (90.5%), sensitivities of 60/80 (88.2%) to 70/79 (88.6%), specificities of 112/132 (84.9%) to 111/121 (91.7%), negative predictive values (NPV) of 112/120 (93.3%) to 111/120 (92.5%), respectively. False-negative CTs regarding RT-PCR were mainly explained by imaging very early in the disease course (5 out of 8 cases) or COVID-19 infection with no/minor respiratory symptoms (3 out of 8 cases).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Assessing chest CT using CO-RADS is a valuable diagnostic approach for COVID-19 infection in a high-prevalence area, with a higher accuracy than CTIS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56282,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034407/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/jbsr.2342\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jbsr.2342","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

目的:提出了报告和数据系统(CO-RADS)和CT受累评分(CTIS)来评估COVID-19在胸部CT上的表现。这项单中心回顾性研究的目的是评估两种评分系统在高流行地区诊断COVID-19感染的效果。材料和方法:纳入胸部CT数据集(n = 200)和鼻咽拭子逆转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)。在CO-RADS和CTIS评分后,将CT扫描分为四个“成像组”。分别以RT-PCR和临床诊断为金标准计算胸部CT的诊断准确率,并利用医学档案对胸部CT RT-PCR的假阴性和假阳性进行更深入的研究。结果:以初始RT-PCR或最终临床诊断为参考标准,包括CO-RADS 4/5评分的“影像学组”对COVID-19的诊断价值最高:准确率为172/200(86%)至181/200(90.5%),敏感性为60/80(88.2%)至70/79(88.6%),特异性为112/132(84.9%)至111/121(91.7%),阴性预测值(NPV)分别为112/120(93.3%)至111/120(92.5%)。RT-PCR假阴性主要解释为病程早期显像(8例中有5例)或COVID-19感染无/轻微呼吸道症状(8例中有3例)。结论:应用CO-RADS评估胸部CT对高流行地区的COVID-19感染有较高的诊断价值,且准确率高于CTIS。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Chest CT Diagnosis of COVID-19: Accuracy using CO-RADS and CT-Involvement Scoring.

Chest CT Diagnosis of COVID-19: Accuracy using CO-RADS and CT-Involvement Scoring.

Chest CT Diagnosis of COVID-19: Accuracy using CO-RADS and CT-Involvement Scoring.

Chest CT Diagnosis of COVID-19: Accuracy using CO-RADS and CT-Involvement Scoring.

Objectives: Both Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) and CT-involvement scores (CTIS) have been proposed for evaluation of COVID-19 on chest CT. The purpose of this single-center, retrospective study was to evaluate both scoring systems to diagnose COVID-19 infection in a high-prevalence area.

Materials and methods: Chest CT datasets (n = 200) and available reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on nasopharyngeal swab were included. CT scans were assigned to four 'imaging groups' after scoring for both CO-RADS and CTIS. Diagnostic accuracy of chest CT was calculated respectively using RT-PCR and clinical diagnosis as gold standards: False-negatives and false-positives of chest CT regarding RT-PCR were studied in more depth using the medical files.

Results: The 'imaging group' including CO-RADS 4/5 scores reached the highest diagnostic values for COVID-19 considering either the initial RT-PCR or the final clinical diagnosis as the standard of reference: accuracies of 172/200 (86%) to 181/200 (90.5%), sensitivities of 60/80 (88.2%) to 70/79 (88.6%), specificities of 112/132 (84.9%) to 111/121 (91.7%), negative predictive values (NPV) of 112/120 (93.3%) to 111/120 (92.5%), respectively. False-negative CTs regarding RT-PCR were mainly explained by imaging very early in the disease course (5 out of 8 cases) or COVID-19 infection with no/minor respiratory symptoms (3 out of 8 cases).

Conclusion: Assessing chest CT using CO-RADS is a valuable diagnostic approach for COVID-19 infection in a high-prevalence area, with a higher accuracy than CTIS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology
Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The purpose of the Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology is the publication of articles dealing with diagnostic and interventional radiology, related imaging techniques, allied sciences, and continuing education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信