4.7 Article

Efficacy of chest CT scan for COVID-19 diagnosis in a low prevalence and incidence region

Journal

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
Volume 31, Issue 11, Pages 8141-8146

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-07863-4

Keywords

Sensitivity and specificity; COVID-19; Tomography; X-ray computed; Thorax

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In a low prevalence area, chest CT scan is a valuable diagnostic tool for ruling out COVID-19 infection in symptomatic suspected patients.
Objectives Value of chest CT was mainly studied in area of high COVID-19 incidence. The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate chest CT performances to diagnose COVID-19 pneumonia with regard to RT-PCR as reference standard in a low incidence area. Methods A survey was sent to radiology department in 4 hospitals in an administrative French region of weak disease prevalence (3.4%). Study design was approved by the local institutional review board and recorded on the website (NCT04339686). Written informed consent was waived due to retrospective anonymized data collection. Patients who underwent a RT-PCR and a chest CT scan within 48 h for COVID-19 pneumonia suspicion were consecutively included. Diagnostic accuracy including the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of chest CT regarding RT-PCR as reference standard were calculated. Results One hundred twenty-nine patients had abnormal chest CT findings compatible with a COVID-19 pneumonia (26%, 129/487). Among the 358 negative chest CT findings, 3% (10/358) were RT-PCR positive. Chest CT sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive value were respectively 87% (IC95: 85, 89; 69/79), 85% (IC95: 83, 87; 348/408), 53% (IC95: 50, 56; 69/129), and 97% (IC95: 95, 99; 348/358). Conclusions In a low prevalence area, chest CT scan is a good diagnostic tool to rule out COVID-19 infection among symptomatic suspected patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available