Chest X-Ray Scoring System in COVID-19 Pneumonia: An Added Value in the Evaluation of the Disease Severity

M. Fogante
{"title":"Chest X-Ray Scoring System in COVID-19 Pneumonia: An Added Value in the Evaluation of the Disease Severity","authors":"M. Fogante","doi":"10.14744/ejmo.2021.70171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To analyze the added value of a new CXR scoring system in the evaluation of the COVID-19 pneumonia severity. Methods: This retrospective study included, from March to April 2020, 169 (132M/37F) hospitalized COVID-19 patients, mean age 65.6±10.8 years;57 had low-pressure ventilation (Group A), 50 positive-pressure ventilation (Group B) and 62 invasive ventilation (Group C). Two radiologists in consensus evaluated the CXRs using an 18-points scoring system. CXR scores were compared in each Group and among the three Groups. Then in each Group CXR scores were correlated with Pa02/Fi02 and, in Group C, with Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS). Non-parametric tests were used. Results: In Group A the median score at admission was 8 [Interquartile range (IR) 7-9] and the median of the highest scores was 9 [IR 8-10](p=0.0738). Median scores at admission and before the start of the ventilation (pre-ventilation) are resulted, in Group B, 10 [IR 8-10] and 11 [IR 10-14](p<0.0001) and, in Group C, 10 [IR 8-11] and 12 [IR 11-13](p<0.0001). In Group A the CXR scores at admission were lower than in Group C (p=0.0257), and the highest scores were lower than the pre-ventilation ones of Groups B (p=0.0018) and C (p=0.0001). The CXR scores correlated negatively with Pa02/Fi02 and positively with SAPS. Conclusion: CXR scoring system could be an added value in the evaluation of COVID-19 pneumonia severity. With lowpressure ventilation, the CXR scores were lower than with positive-pressure and invasive ventilation. Furthermore, CXR scores showed negative correlation with Pa02/Fi02 and positive with SAPS. Implications for practice: This new CXR scoring system could be a useful diagnostic tool to quantify the COVID-19 pneumonia severity and to guide to choice of the correct ventilation support. © 2021 by Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology.","PeriodicalId":11831,"journal":{"name":"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/ejmo.2021.70171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To analyze the added value of a new CXR scoring system in the evaluation of the COVID-19 pneumonia severity. Methods: This retrospective study included, from March to April 2020, 169 (132M/37F) hospitalized COVID-19 patients, mean age 65.6±10.8 years;57 had low-pressure ventilation (Group A), 50 positive-pressure ventilation (Group B) and 62 invasive ventilation (Group C). Two radiologists in consensus evaluated the CXRs using an 18-points scoring system. CXR scores were compared in each Group and among the three Groups. Then in each Group CXR scores were correlated with Pa02/Fi02 and, in Group C, with Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS). Non-parametric tests were used. Results: In Group A the median score at admission was 8 [Interquartile range (IR) 7-9] and the median of the highest scores was 9 [IR 8-10](p=0.0738). Median scores at admission and before the start of the ventilation (pre-ventilation) are resulted, in Group B, 10 [IR 8-10] and 11 [IR 10-14](p<0.0001) and, in Group C, 10 [IR 8-11] and 12 [IR 11-13](p<0.0001). In Group A the CXR scores at admission were lower than in Group C (p=0.0257), and the highest scores were lower than the pre-ventilation ones of Groups B (p=0.0018) and C (p=0.0001). The CXR scores correlated negatively with Pa02/Fi02 and positively with SAPS. Conclusion: CXR scoring system could be an added value in the evaluation of COVID-19 pneumonia severity. With lowpressure ventilation, the CXR scores were lower than with positive-pressure and invasive ventilation. Furthermore, CXR scores showed negative correlation with Pa02/Fi02 and positive with SAPS. Implications for practice: This new CXR scoring system could be a useful diagnostic tool to quantify the COVID-19 pneumonia severity and to guide to choice of the correct ventilation support. © 2021 by Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新型冠状病毒肺炎胸片评分系统:疾病严重程度评价的附加价值
目的:分析一种新的CXR评分系统在评估COVID-19肺炎严重程度中的附加价值。方法:回顾性研究纳入2020年3月至4月住院的新冠肺炎患者169例(132M/37F),平均年龄65.6±10.8岁,其中低压通气57例(A组),正压通气50例(B组),有创通气62例(C组)。两位放射科医师一致采用18分制对cxr进行评估。比较各组及三组间的CXR评分。然后各组CXR评分与Pa02/Fi02相关,C组与简化急性生理评分(SAPS)相关。采用非参数检验。结果:A组患者入院时评分中位数为8[四分位间距(IR) 7 ~ 9],最高评分中位数为9 [IR 8 ~ 10](p=0.0738)。入院时和通气(预通气)开始前的中位评分,B组为10 [IR 8-10]和11 [IR 10-14](p<0.0001), C组为10 [IR 8-11]和12 [IR 11-13](p<0.0001)。A组患者入院时CXR评分低于C组(p=0.0257),最高评分低于B组(p=0.0018)和C组(p=0.0001)。CXR评分与Pa02/Fi02呈负相关,与SAPS呈正相关。结论:CXR评分系统可作为评估COVID-19肺炎严重程度的一种附加价值。低压通气组的CXR评分低于正压通气组和有创通气组。此外,CXR评分与Pa02/Fi02呈负相关,与SAPS呈正相关。实践意义:这种新的CXR评分系统可能是量化COVID-19肺炎严重程度和指导选择正确通气支持的有用诊断工具。©2021 by Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Non-Nuclear and Rare Nuclear ANA Patterns in Indirect Immunoflourescence Testing and their Clinical Associations Association of Leucocyte Telomere Length with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Risk and Prognosis Epigenetic Code for Cell Fate During Development and Disease in Human Radio-Pathological Correlation of Suspected Malignant Thyroid Nodules using Elastography strain ratio and Bethesda Classification for Thyroid Cytopathology Linked Color Imaging and Color Analytic Model Based on Pixel Brightness for Diagnosing H. Pylori Infection in Gastric Antrum
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1