| Literature DB >> 33712292 |
F Zhao1, L Zheng2, F Shan3, Y Dai2, J Shen3, S Yang3, Y Shi3, K Xue2, Z Zhang4.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the lung function of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients using oxygen-enhanced (OE) ultrashort echo time (UTE) MRI.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33712292 PMCID: PMC7906509 DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2021.02.008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Radiol ISSN: 0009-9260 Impact factor: 2.350
Summary of the demographic and clinical features of the patients.
| Variables | Total ( |
|---|---|
| Age, years (mean ± SD) | 31.58 ± 14.43 |
| Sex male, | 30 (61.2%) |
| Severities, | |
| Mild | 16 (32.7%) |
| Common | 33 (67.3%) |
| Symptoms, | |
| Cough | 18 (36.7%) |
| Fever | 23 (46.9%) |
| Chest pressure | 5 (3.4%) |
| Sore throat | 5 (3.4%) |
| Diarrhoea | 7 (4.7%) |
| Lesion size, mm2 (mean ± SD) | 451.60 ± 749.53 |
| Lesion types, | |
| Pure GGOs | 25 (15.7%) |
| GGOs with consolidation | 120 (75.5%) |
| Consolidation | 11 (6.9%) |
| Crazy-paving pattern | 3 (1.9%) |
| Imaging-positive, | 33 (67.3%) |
SD, standard deviation; GGOs, ground glass opacities; RT-PCR, real-time polymerase chain reaction.
Result of lesion detectability between CT and UTE-MRI.
| Radiological findings | Method | Visual score | κ | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||||
| Pure GGOs | CT | 134 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 22 | 0.678 | <0.05 |
| UTE | 135 | 0 | 3 | 10 | 11 | |||
| GGOs with consolidation | CT | 39 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 114 | 0.444 | <0.05 |
| UTE | 39 | 2 | 7 | 53 | 58 | |||
| Consolidation | CT | 148 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0.903 | <0.05 |
| UTE | 148 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 9 | |||
| Crazy-paving pattern | CT | 156 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | <0.05 |
| UTE | 156 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | |||
| All lesions | CT | 477 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 150 | 0.709 | <0.05 |
| UTE | 478 | 2 | 10 | 65 | 81 | |||
CT, computed tomography; UTE, ultrashort echo time; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; GGOs, ground glass opacities.
κ was interpreted as follows: 0.00–0.20 indicates poor agreement; 0.21–0.40, fair agreement; 0.41–0.60, moderate agreement; 0.61–0.80, good agreement; and >0.81, very good agreement.
Figure 1Patient-based analysis for mild-type and common-type COVID-19. (a) CT image from a mild-type patient without lesions. (b) Hyperoxic transverse UTE-MRI image from a mild-type patient without lesions. (c) Mask generated from (b). (d) PSE map for the mild-type patient. (e) CT image from a common-type patient with two COVID-19-related lesions. (f) Hyperoxic transverse UTE-MRI image from a common-type patient with two COVID-19-related lesions. (g) Mask generated from (f). (h) PSE map for the common-type patient.
Figure 2Comparison of the PSE between mild-type patients and common-type patients using the Mann–Whitney U-test.
Figure 3Representative lesion-based analysis of a 62-year-old female patient. (a) Lesion 1 (red arrow) on a CT image with radiological findings of GGO with consolidation and visual score = 5. (b) Lesion 2 (yellow arrow) on the CT image with radiological finding: GGO with consolidation, visual score = 5. (c) Lesion 1 and lesion 2 on the transverse UTE-MRI image. Radiological findings for lesion 1 are GGO with consolidation, visual score = 3. Radiological findings for lesion 2 are GGO with consolidation, visual score = 4. (d) Manifestation of lesions 1 and 2 on the PSE map.
Figure 4Comparison of the PSE between COVID-19-related lesions and pulmonary parenchyma using the Mann–Whitney U-test.
Figure 5Comparison of PSE between different lesion types using the Kruskal–Wallis test.