Cargando…

The diagnostic value of chest X-ray in coronavirus disease 2019: A comparative study of X-ray and CT

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic spreads around the world, the demand for imaging examinations increases accordingly. The value of conventional chest radiography (CCR) remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of CCR in the detection of COVID-19...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zeng, Fengxia, Cai, Yong, Guo, Yi, Chen, Weiguo, Lin, Min, Zheng, Jun, Zeng, Hui, Wang, Sina, Qin, Genggeng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10450779/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34424791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00368504211016204
_version_ 1785095274050355200
author Zeng, Fengxia
Cai, Yong
Guo, Yi
Chen, Weiguo
Lin, Min
Zheng, Jun
Zeng, Hui
Wang, Sina
Qin, Genggeng
author_facet Zeng, Fengxia
Cai, Yong
Guo, Yi
Chen, Weiguo
Lin, Min
Zheng, Jun
Zeng, Hui
Wang, Sina
Qin, Genggeng
author_sort Zeng, Fengxia
collection PubMed
description As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic spreads around the world, the demand for imaging examinations increases accordingly. The value of conventional chest radiography (CCR) remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of CCR in the detection of COVID-19 through a comparative analysis of CCR and CT. This study included 49 patients with 52 CT images and chest radiographs of pathogen-confirmed COVID-19 cases and COVID-19-suspected cases that were found to be negative (non-COVID-19). The performance of CCR in detecting COVID-19 was compared to CT imaging. The major signatures that allowed for differentiation between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cases were also evaluated. Approximately 75% (39/52) of images had positive findings on the chest x-ray examinations, while 80.7% (42/52) had positive chest CT scans. The COVID-19 group accounted for 88.4% (23/26) of positive chest X-ray examinations and 96.1% (25/26) of positive chest CT scans. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CCR for abnormal shadows were 88%, 80%, and 87%, respectively, for all patients. For the COVID-19 group, the accuracy of CCR was 92%. The primary signature on CCR was flocculent shadows in both groups. The shadows were primarily in the bi-pulmonary, which was significantly different from non-COVID-19 patients (p = 0.008). The major CT finding of COVID-19 patients was ground-glass opacities in both lungs, while in non-COVID-19 patients, consolidations combined with ground-glass opacities were more common in one lung than both lungs (p = 0.0001). CCR showed excellent performance in detecting abnormal shadows in patients with confirmed COVID-19. However, it has limited value in differentiating COVID-19 patients from non-COVID-19 patients. Through the typical epidemiological history, laboratory examinations, and clinical symptoms, combined with the distributive characteristics of shadows, CCR may be useful to identify patients with possible COVID-19. This will allow for the rapid identification and quarantine of patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10450779
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104507792023-08-26 The diagnostic value of chest X-ray in coronavirus disease 2019: A comparative study of X-ray and CT Zeng, Fengxia Cai, Yong Guo, Yi Chen, Weiguo Lin, Min Zheng, Jun Zeng, Hui Wang, Sina Qin, Genggeng Sci Prog Article As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic spreads around the world, the demand for imaging examinations increases accordingly. The value of conventional chest radiography (CCR) remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of CCR in the detection of COVID-19 through a comparative analysis of CCR and CT. This study included 49 patients with 52 CT images and chest radiographs of pathogen-confirmed COVID-19 cases and COVID-19-suspected cases that were found to be negative (non-COVID-19). The performance of CCR in detecting COVID-19 was compared to CT imaging. The major signatures that allowed for differentiation between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cases were also evaluated. Approximately 75% (39/52) of images had positive findings on the chest x-ray examinations, while 80.7% (42/52) had positive chest CT scans. The COVID-19 group accounted for 88.4% (23/26) of positive chest X-ray examinations and 96.1% (25/26) of positive chest CT scans. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CCR for abnormal shadows were 88%, 80%, and 87%, respectively, for all patients. For the COVID-19 group, the accuracy of CCR was 92%. The primary signature on CCR was flocculent shadows in both groups. The shadows were primarily in the bi-pulmonary, which was significantly different from non-COVID-19 patients (p = 0.008). The major CT finding of COVID-19 patients was ground-glass opacities in both lungs, while in non-COVID-19 patients, consolidations combined with ground-glass opacities were more common in one lung than both lungs (p = 0.0001). CCR showed excellent performance in detecting abnormal shadows in patients with confirmed COVID-19. However, it has limited value in differentiating COVID-19 patients from non-COVID-19 patients. Through the typical epidemiological history, laboratory examinations, and clinical symptoms, combined with the distributive characteristics of shadows, CCR may be useful to identify patients with possible COVID-19. This will allow for the rapid identification and quarantine of patients. SAGE Publications 2021-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10450779/ /pubmed/34424791 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00368504211016204 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Zeng, Fengxia
Cai, Yong
Guo, Yi
Chen, Weiguo
Lin, Min
Zheng, Jun
Zeng, Hui
Wang, Sina
Qin, Genggeng
The diagnostic value of chest X-ray in coronavirus disease 2019: A comparative study of X-ray and CT
title The diagnostic value of chest X-ray in coronavirus disease 2019: A comparative study of X-ray and CT
title_full The diagnostic value of chest X-ray in coronavirus disease 2019: A comparative study of X-ray and CT
title_fullStr The diagnostic value of chest X-ray in coronavirus disease 2019: A comparative study of X-ray and CT
title_full_unstemmed The diagnostic value of chest X-ray in coronavirus disease 2019: A comparative study of X-ray and CT
title_short The diagnostic value of chest X-ray in coronavirus disease 2019: A comparative study of X-ray and CT
title_sort diagnostic value of chest x-ray in coronavirus disease 2019: a comparative study of x-ray and ct
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10450779/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34424791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00368504211016204
work_keys_str_mv AT zengfengxia thediagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT caiyong thediagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT guoyi thediagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT chenweiguo thediagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT linmin thediagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT zhengjun thediagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT zenghui thediagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT wangsina thediagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT qingenggeng thediagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT zengfengxia diagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT caiyong diagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT guoyi diagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT chenweiguo diagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT linmin diagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT zhengjun diagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT zenghui diagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT wangsina diagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct
AT qingenggeng diagnosticvalueofchestxrayincoronavirusdisease2019acomparativestudyofxrayandct