Journals / Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology / 2021 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 3

A comparison of clinical, laboratory and chest CT findings of laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed COVID-19 patients at first admission

Pages
336–343
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

PURPOSE This study aims to identify chest computed tomography (CT) characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), investigate the association between CT findings and laboratory or demographic findings, and compare the accuracy of chest CT with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).METHODSOverall, 120 of 159 consecutive cases isolated due to suspected COVID-19 at our hospital between 17 and 25 March 2020 were included in this retrospective study.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:PURPOSE This study aims to identify chest computed tomography (CT) characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), investigate the association between CT findings and laboratory or demographic findings, and compare the accuracy of chest CT with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).METHODSOverall, 120 of 159 consecutive cases isolated due to suspected COVID-19 at our hospital between 17 and 25 March 2020 were included in this retrospective study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The patients were divided into two groups: laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and clinically diagnosed COVID-19.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The clinical, laboratory, and CT findings of laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed COVID-19 patients are similar.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2019 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

PURPOSE This study aims to identify chest computed tomography (CT) characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), investigate the association between CT findings and laboratory or demographic findings, and compare the accuracy of chest CT with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).METHODSOverall, 120 of 159 consecutive cases isolated due to suspected COVID-19 at our hospital between 17 and 25 March 2020 were included in this retrospective study. All patients underwent both chest CT and RT-PCR at first admission. The patients were divided into two groups: laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and clinically diagnosed COVID-19. Clinical findings, laboratory findings, radiologic features and CT severity index (CT-SI) of the patients were noted. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of chest CT were calculated for the diagnosis of COVID-19, using RT-PCR as reference.RESULTSThe laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed COVID-19 groups consisted of 69 (M/F 43/26, mean age 50.9±14.0 years) and 51 patients (M/F 24/27, mean age 50.9±18.8 years), respectively. Dry cough (62.3% vs. 52.9%), fever (30.4% vs. 25.5%) and dyspnea (23.2% vs. 27.5%) were the most common admission symptoms in the laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed COVID-19 groups, respectively. Bilateral multilobe involvement (83.1% vs. 57.5%), peripheral distribution (96.9% vs. 97.5%), patchy shape (75.4% vs. 70.0%), ground-glass opacities (GGO) (96.9% vs. 100.0%), vascular enlargement (56.9% vs. 50.0%), intralobular reticular density (40.0% vs. 40.0%) and bronchial wall thickening (27.7% vs. 45.0%) were the most common CT findings in the laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed COVID-19 subgroups, respectively. Except for the bilateral involvement and white blood cell (WBC) count, no difference was found between the clinical, laboratory, and parenchymal findings of the two groups. Positive correlation was found between CT-SI and, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and C-reactive protein (CRP) values in the laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 subgroup. Chest CT and RT-PCR positivity rates among patients with suspected COVID-19 were 87.5% (105/120) and 57.5% (69/120), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy rates of chest CT were determined as 94.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.8–98.4), 21.57% (95% CI, 11.3–35.3), 61.90% (95% CI, 58.2–65.5), 73.3% (95% CI, 48.2–89.1) and 63.3% (95% CI, 54.1–71.9), respectively.CONCLUSIONChest CT has high sensitivity and low specificity in the diagnosis of COVID-19. The clinical, laboratory, and CT findings of laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed COVID-19 patients are similar.

🔖

Cite This Article

KUZAN, T. Y., ALTINTOPRAK, K. M., ÇİFTÇİ, H. Ö., ERGÜL, U., ÖZDEMİR, N. B. Ü., BULUT, M., YİYİT, N. (2021). A comparison of clinical, laboratory and chest CT findings of laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed COVID-19 patients at first admission. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 3, 336–343. https://ajindex.com/articles/350087

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Zhao W, Zhong Z, Xie X, Yu Q, Liu J. Relation between chest CT findings and clinical conditions of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pneumonia: a multicenter study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2020
  2. 1072–1077. [Crossref] 2. Turkish Ministry of Health COVID-19 (SARSCoV-2 INFECTION) GUIDE-Study of Scientific Board Turkish Ministry of Health, Ankara, Turkey. https://covid19.saglik.gov.tr/ 3. World Health Organization (2020) Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) situation report–51. World Health Organization, Geneva. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/ coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200311-sitrep-51-covid-19.pdf?sfvrsn=1ba62e57_10 4. Park M, Cook AR, Lim JT, Sun Y, Dickens BL. A systematic review of COVID-19 epidemiology based on current evidence. J Clin Med 2020
  3. [Crossref] 5. Xu YH, Dong JH, An WM, et al. Clinical and computed tomographic imaging features of novel coronavirus pneumonia caused by SARSCoV-2. J Infect 2020
  4. 394–400. [Crossref] 6. Xie X, Zhong Z, Zhao W, Zheng C, Wang F, Liu J. Chest CT for typical 2019-nCoV pneumonia: relationship to negative RT-PCR testing. Radiology 2020
  5. E41–45. 7. Sverzellati N, Milone F, Balbi M. How imaging should properly be used in COVID-19 outbreak: an Italian experience. Diagn Interv Radiol 2020
  6. 204–206. [Crossref] 8. Fang Y, Zhang H, Xie J, et al. Sensitivity of chest CT for COVID-19: comparison to RT-PCR. Radiology 2020:200432. [Crossref] 9. Caruso D, Zerunian M, Polici M, et al. Chest CT features of COVID-19 in Rome, Italy. Radiology 2020:201237. [Crossref] 10. Wen Z, Chi Y, Zhang L, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019: ınitial detection on chest CT in a retrospective multicenter study of 103 Chinese subjects. Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging 2020
  7. e200092. [Crossref] 11. British Society of Thoracic Imaging. Thoracic Imaging in COVID 19 Infection Guidance for the Reporting Radiologist Version 2. https:// www.bsti.org.uk/standards-clinical-guidelines/clinical-guidelines/bsti-covid-19-guidance-for-the-reporting-radiologist/ 12. Shi H, Han X, Jiang N, et al. Radiological findings from 81 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet Infect Dis 2020
  8. 425–434. [Crossref] 13. Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, et al. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet 2020
  9. 497–506. [Crossref] 14. Zhu J, Ji P, Pang J, et al. Clinical characteristics of 3,062 COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis. J Med Virol 2020 Apr 15. [Epub Ahead of Print].[Crossre