Author: Ducray, Victoria; Vlachomitrou, Anna Sesilia; Bouscambert-Duchamp, Maude; Si-Mohamed, Salim; Gouttard, Sylvain; Mansuy, Adeline; Wickert, Florian; Sigal, Alain; Gaymard, Alexandre; Talbot, François; Michel, Catherine; Perpoint, Thomas; Pialat, Jean-Baptiste; Rouviere, Olivier; Milot, Laurent; Cotton, François; Douek, Philippe; Rabilloud, Muriel; Boussel, Loic
Title: Chest CT for rapid triage of patients in multiple emergency departments during COVID-19 epidemic: experience report from a large French university hospital Cord-id: 7ujwyqfc Document date: 2020_8_19
ID: 7ujwyqfc
Snippet: OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic performances of chest CT for triage of patients in multiple emergency departments during COVID-19 epidemic, in comparison with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. METHOD: From March 3 to April 4, 2020, 694 consecutive patients from three emergency departments of a large university hospital, for which a hospitalization was planned whatever the reasons, i.e., COVID- or non-COVID-related, underwent a chest CT and one or several RT-PCR
Document: OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic performances of chest CT for triage of patients in multiple emergency departments during COVID-19 epidemic, in comparison with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. METHOD: From March 3 to April 4, 2020, 694 consecutive patients from three emergency departments of a large university hospital, for which a hospitalization was planned whatever the reasons, i.e., COVID- or non-COVID-related, underwent a chest CT and one or several RT-PCR tests. Chest CTs were rated as “Surely COVID+,†“Possible COVID+,†or “COVID−†by experienced radiologists. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated using the final RT-PCR test as standard of reference. The delays for CT reports and RT-PCR results were recorded and compared. RESULTS: Among the 694 patients, 287 were positive on the final RT-PCR exam. Concerning the 694 chest CT, 308 were rated as “Surely COVID+â€, 34 as “Possible COVID+,†and 352 as “COVID−.†When considering only the “Surely COVID+†CT as positive, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV reached 88.9%, 90.2%, 88%, 84.1%, and 92.7%, respectively, with respect to final RT-PCR test. The mean delay for CT reports was three times shorter than for RT-PCR results (187 ± 148 min versus 573 ± 327 min, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: During COVID-19 epidemic phase, chest CT is a rapid and most probably an adequately reliable tool to refer patients requiring hospitalization to the COVID+ or COVID− hospital units, when response times for virological tests are too long. KEY POINTS: • In a large university hospital in Lyon, France, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of chest CT for COVID-19 reached 88.9%, 90.2%, 88%, 84.1%, and 92.7%, respectively, using RT-PCR as standard of reference. • The mean delay for CT reports was three times shorter than for RT-PCR results (187 ± 148 min versus 573 ± 327 min, p < 0.0001). • Due to high accuracy of chest CT for COVID-19 and shorter time for CT reports than RT-PCR results, chest CT can be used to orient patients suspected to be positive towards the COVID+ unit to decrease congestion in the emergency departments.
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- acid detection and low respiratory: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date