Furkan Ufuk1, Mahmut Demirci1, Erhan Uğurlu2, Nazlı Çetin2, Nilüfer Yiğit2, Tuğba Sarı3. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Pamukkale, Denizli, Turkey. 2. Department of Pulmonary Medicine, University of Pamukkale, Denizli, Turkey. 3. Department of Infectious Diseases, University of Pamukkale, Denizli, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to assess the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia on computed tomography (CT) using quantitative (QCT) and semiquantitative (SCT) assessments and compare with the clinical findings. METHODS: Two observers independently examined the CT images of COVID-19 patients, and the SCT severity score was calculated. The SCT score was calculated as the sum of values ranging from 0 to 4, according to the volumetric rate of involvement for each lung lobe. In quantitative assessment, total lung volume (TLV) was automatically calculated from CT density values between -200 and -950 HU. Besides, healthy lung volume (HLV) was calculated from voxels between -800 and -950 HU. The QCT score was calculated with the following formula: (TLV - HLV / TLV) ×100. All patients were clinically divided into four groups: mild, common, severe, and critical. Interobserver agreement for SCT assessment was investigated using the Cohen's Kappa statistics (κ). Pearson's correlation coefficient was used for the relationship between continuous data. The diagnostic accuracy of SCT and QCT in the differentiation of clinically limited (mild, common) and extensive (severe, critical) disease was investigated using ROC analysis. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were included. There was good agreement between the two observers in the SCT evaluation of pulmonary disease severity (κ = 0.796; 95% CI, 0.751-0.841). A significant correlation was found between QCT and SCT scores (p < 0.001, r = 0.661). Both QCT and SCT scores showed a significant correlation with clinical severity score (p < 0.001, r = 0.620 and p = 0.004, r = 0.529, respectively). The ROC analysis revealed the AUC of QCT and SCT for differentiation of limited and extensive disease as 0.873 (95% CI, 0.774-0.972) and 0.816 (95% CI, 0.673-0.959), respectively. CONCLUSION: The QCT assessment is an objective method in the evaluation of COVID-19 severity and is more successful than semiquantitative CT assessment to discriminate extensive from limited disease.
PURPOSE: We aimed to assess the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia on computed tomography (CT) using quantitative (QCT) and semiquantitative (SCT) assessments and compare with the clinical findings. METHODS: Two observers independently examined the CT images of COVID-19patients, and the SCT severity score was calculated. The SCT score was calculated as the sum of values ranging from 0 to 4, according to the volumetric rate of involvement for each lung lobe. In quantitative assessment, total lung volume (TLV) was automatically calculated from CT density values between -200 and -950 HU. Besides, healthy lung volume (HLV) was calculated from voxels between -800 and -950 HU. The QCT score was calculated with the following formula: (TLV - HLV / TLV) ×100. All patients were clinically divided into four groups: mild, common, severe, and critical. Interobserver agreement for SCT assessment was investigated using the Cohen's Kappa statistics (κ). Pearson's correlation coefficient was used for the relationship between continuous data. The diagnostic accuracy of SCT and QCT in the differentiation of clinically limited (mild, common) and extensive (severe, critical) disease was investigated using ROC analysis. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were included. There was good agreement between the two observers in the SCT evaluation of pulmonary disease severity (κ = 0.796; 95% CI, 0.751-0.841). A significant correlation was found between QCT and SCT scores (p < 0.001, r = 0.661). Both QCT and SCT scores showed a significant correlation with clinical severity score (p < 0.001, r = 0.620 and p = 0.004, r = 0.529, respectively). The ROC analysis revealed the AUC of QCT and SCT for differentiation of limited and extensive disease as 0.873 (95% CI, 0.774-0.972) and 0.816 (95% CI, 0.673-0.959), respectively. CONCLUSION: The QCT assessment is an objective method in the evaluation of COVID-19 severity and is more successful than semiquantitative CT assessment to discriminate extensive from limited disease.
Authors: David M Hansell; Alexander A Bankier; Heber MacMahon; Theresa C McLoud; Nestor L Müller; Jacques Remy Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-01-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Adam Bernheim; Xueyan Mei; Mingqian Huang; Yang Yang; Zahi A Fayad; Ning Zhang; Kaiyue Diao; Bin Lin; Xiqi Zhu; Kunwei Li; Shaolin Li; Hong Shan; Adam Jacobi; Michael Chung Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-02-20 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Harrison X Bai; Ben Hsieh; Zeng Xiong; Kasey Halsey; Ji Whae Choi; Thi My Linh Tran; Ian Pan; Lin-Bo Shi; Dong-Cui Wang; Ji Mei; Xiao-Long Jiang; Qiu-Hua Zeng; Thomas K Egglin; Ping-Feng Hu; Saurabh Agarwal; Fang-Fang Xie; Sha Li; Terrance Healey; Michael K Atalay; Wei-Hua Liao Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Maria Elena Laino; Angela Ammirabile; Ludovica Lofino; Dara Joseph Lundon; Arturo Chiti; Marco Francone; Victor Savevski Journal: Emerg Radiol Date: 2022-01-20