Research Article

Can Chest CT be The First-Line Diagnostic Test in COVID-19? A Cross-Sectional Study

Volume: 44 Number: 4 December 31, 2022
Cumhuriyet Medical Journal Cover
Cumhuriyet Medical Journal
PDF Download
EN

Can Chest CT be The First-Line Diagnostic Test in COVID-19? A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

Background/aim: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, chest computerized tomography (CCT) was shown to be more sensitive than real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) in detecting the disease, especially in regions with high disease prevalence. In this study, we aimed to determine the sensitivity and specificity of chest CT in the diagnosis of COVID-19. Materials and Methods: Between 17 March, 2020 and 25 April, 2020, 2170 patients who were admitted to the hospital for any reason and underwent chest CT scanning were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with a pre-diagnosis of COVID-19 and a positive rRT-PCR test, two consecutive negative rRT-PCR tests, or with a first negative rRT-PCR test and a positive follow-up rRT-PCR test were included. The day of the rRT-PCR test for these patients was counted as day “0,” and 200 patients whose CCT was performed within +/- three days were included in the study. Results: Of the 200 patients included in the study, 118 were rRT-PCR-positive, and 82 were rRT-PCR-negative. Of the 118 patients with positive rRT-PCR results, 62/118 (52.5%) had positive CCT scans. With the rRT-PCR results as the reference, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CCT in indicating COVID-19 infection were 52.5% (95% CI 43–61%), 67% (95% CI 56–77%), and 58.5% (95% CI 51-65%), respectively. The negative predictive value of CCT in diagnosing COVID-19 was greater for women than for men (p = 0.01). Conclusions: In regions where the prevalence of COVID-19 is not high, the use of CCT in the diagnosis of the disease is not an alternative to the rRT-PCR test due to its low sensitivity.

Keywords

References

  1. 1. Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, et al. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:727-733.
  2. 2. Golob JL, Lugogo N, Lauring AS, Lok AS. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: a triumph of science and collaboration. JCI Insight. 2021.
  3. 3. Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill. 2020;25.
  4. 4. Arevalo-Rodriguez I, Buitrago-Garcia D, Simancas-Racines D, et al. False-negative results of initial RT-PCR assays for COVID-19: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0242958.
  5. 5. Green DA, Zucker J, Westblade LF, et al. Clinical Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Tests. J Clin Microbiol. 2020;58.
  6. 6. Kanji JN, Zelyas N, MacDonald C, et al. False negative rate of COVID-19 PCR testing: a discordant testing analysis. Virol J. 2021;18:13.
  7. 7. Ye Z, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Huang Z, Song B. Chest CT manifestations of new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a pictorial review. Eur Radiol. 2020;30:4381-4389.
  8. 8. Fang Y, Zhang H, Xie J, et al. Sensitivity of Chest CT for COVID-19: Comparison to RT-PCR. Radiology. 2020;296:E115-E117.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Health Care Administration

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Publication Date

December 31, 2022

Submission Date

August 21, 2022

Acceptance Date

December 21, 2022

Published in Issue

Year 2022 Volume: 44 Number: 4

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7197/cmj.1164858

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA98WC87ET

Cite

RIS / Bibtex
AMA
1.Çaylak H, Atasoy D, Çetinkaya N, Can İ, Sarıismailoğlu R, Atalar M. Can Chest CT be The First-Line Diagnostic Test in COVID-19? A Cross-Sectional Study. CMJ. 2022;44(4):362-369. doi:10.7197/cmj.1164858