Terrence C H Hui1, Hau Wei Khoo1, Barnaby E Young2,3,4, Salahudeen Mohamed Haja Mohideen5, Yeong Shyan Lee1, Chien Joo Lim6, Yee Sin Leo2,3,4,7,8, Gregory J L Kaw1, David C Lye2,3,4,7, Cher Heng Tan1,4. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 2. National Centre for Infectious Diseases, Singapore, Singapore. 3. Department of Infectious Diseases, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 4. Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Singapore, Singapore. 5. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 6. Clinical Research & Innovations Office, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 7. Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. 8. Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chest radiography (CXR) is performed more widely and readily than CT for the management of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), but there remains little data on its clinical utility. This study aims to assess the diagnostic performance of CXR, with emphasis on its predictive value, for severe COVID-19 disease. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, 358 chest radiographs were performed on 109 COVID-19 patients (median age 44.4 years, 58 males and 30 with comorbidities) admitted between 22 January 2020 and 15 March 2020. Each CXR was reviewed and scored by three radiologists in consensus using a 72-point COVID-19 Radiographic Score (CRS). Disease severity was determined by the need for supplemental oxygen and mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Patients who needed supplemental oxygen (n=19, 17.4%) were significantly older (P<0.001) and significantly more of them had co-morbidities (P=0.011). They also had higher C-reactive protein (CRP) (P<0.001), higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (P<0.001), lower lymphocyte count (P<0.001) and lower hemoglobin (Hb) (P=0.001). Their initial (CRSinitial) and maximal CRS (CRSmax) were higher (P<0.001). Adjusting for age and baseline hemoglobin, the AUROC of CRSmax (0.983) was as high as CRPmax (0.987) and higher than the AUROC for lymphocyte countmin (0.897), and LDHmax (0.900). The AUROC for CRSinitial was slightly lower (0.930). CRSinitial ≥5 had a sensitivity of 63% and specificity of 92% in predicting the need for oxygen, and 73% sensitivity and 88% specificity in predicting the need for mechanical ventilation. CRS between the 6th and 10th day from the onset of symptoms (CRSD6-10) ≥5 had a sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 95% in predicting the need for oxygen, and 100% sensitivity and 86% specificity in predicting the need for mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Adjusting for key confounders of age and baseline Hb, CRSmax performed comparable to or better than laboratory markers in the diagnosis of severe disease. CXR performed between the 6th and 10th days from symptom onset was a better predictor of severe disease than CXR performed earlier at presentation. A benign clinical course was seen in CXR that were normal or had very mild abnormalities. 2020 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Chest radiography (CXR) is performed more widely and readily than CT for the management of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), but there remains little data on its clinical utility. This study aims to assess the diagnostic performance of CXR, with emphasis on its predictive value, for severe COVID-19 disease. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, 358 chest radiographs were performed on 109 COVID-19 patients (median age 44.4 years, 58 males and 30 with comorbidities) admitted between 22 January 2020 and 15 March 2020. Each CXR was reviewed and scored by three radiologists in consensus using a 72-point COVID-19 Radiographic Score (CRS). Disease severity was determined by the need for supplemental oxygen and mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Patients who needed supplemental oxygen (n=19, 17.4%) were significantly older (P<0.001) and significantly more of them had co-morbidities (P=0.011). They also had higher C-reactive protein (CRP) (P<0.001), higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (P<0.001), lower lymphocyte count (P<0.001) and lower hemoglobin (Hb) (P=0.001). Their initial (CRSinitial) and maximal CRS (CRSmax) were higher (P<0.001). Adjusting for age and baseline hemoglobin, the AUROC of CRSmax (0.983) was as high as CRPmax (0.987) and higher than the AUROC for lymphocyte countmin (0.897), and LDHmax (0.900). The AUROC for CRSinitial was slightly lower (0.930). CRSinitial ≥5 had a sensitivity of 63% and specificity of 92% in predicting the need for oxygen, and 73% sensitivity and 88% specificity in predicting the need for mechanical ventilation. CRS between the 6th and 10th day from the onset of symptoms (CRSD6-10) ≥5 had a sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 95% in predicting the need for oxygen, and 100% sensitivity and 86% specificity in predicting the need for mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Adjusting for key confounders of age and baseline Hb, CRSmax performed comparable to or better than laboratory markers in the diagnosis of severe disease. CXR performed between the 6th and 10th days from symptom onset was a better predictor of severe disease than CXR performed earlier at presentation. A benign clinical course was seen in CXR that were normal or had very mild abnormalities. 2020 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
Authors: Zhan Ye Lim; Hau Wei Khoo; Terrence Chi Hong Hui; Shawn Shi Xian Kok; Kenneth Eng Ling Kwan; Barnaby Edward Young; Cher Heng Tan; Gregory Jon Leng Kaw Journal: Singapore Med J Date: 2020-04-21 Impact factor: 1.858
Authors: Geoffrey D Rubin; Christopher J Ryerson; Linda B Haramati; Nicola Sverzellati; Jeffrey P Kanne; Suhail Raoof; Neil W Schluger; Annalisa Volpi; Jae-Joon Yim; Ian B K Martin; Deverick J Anderson; Christina Kong; Talissa Altes; Andrew Bush; Sujal R Desai; Jonathan Goldin; Jin Mo Goo; Marc Humbert; Yoshikazu Inoue; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Fengming Luo; Peter J Mazzone; Mathias Prokop; Martine Remy-Jardin; Luca Richeldi; Cornelia M Schaefer-Prokop; Noriyuki Tomiyama; Athol U Wells; Ann N Leung Journal: Chest Date: 2020-04-07 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Ho Yuen Frank Wong; Hiu Yin Sonia Lam; Ambrose Ho-Tung Fong; Siu Ting Leung; Thomas Wing-Yan Chin; Christine Shing Yen Lo; Macy Mei-Sze Lui; Jonan Chun Yin Lee; Keith Wan-Hang Chiu; Tom Wai-Hin Chung; Elaine Yuen Phin Lee; Eric Yuk Fai Wan; Ivan Fan Ngai Hung; Tina Poy Wing Lam; Michael D Kuo; Ming-Yen Ng Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-03-27 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: B Shen; M Hoshmand-Kochi; A Abbasi; S Glass; Z Jiang; A J Singer; H C Thode; H Li; W Hou; T Q Duong Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 2.350
Authors: Cristian Giuseppe Monaco; Federico Zaottini; Simone Schiaffino; Alessandro Villa; Gianmarco Della Pepa; Luca Alessandro Carbonaro; Laura Menicagli; Andrea Cozzi; Serena Carriero; Francesco Arpaia; Giovanni Di Leo; Davide Astengo; Ilan Rosenberg; Francesco Sardanelli Journal: Eur Radiol Exp Date: 2020-12-15
Authors: D J Petite Felipe; M I Rivera Campos; J San Miguel Espinosa; Y Malo Rubio; J C Flores Quan; M V Cuartero Revilla Journal: Radiologia (Engl Ed) Date: 2021-06-05