RT-PCR与胸部CT在门诊临床疑似COVID-19患者中的诊断价值

IF 0.2 Q4 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Marmara Medical Journal Pub Date : 2023-08-03 DOI:10.5472/marumj.1379916
Elif TÜKENMEZ TİGEN, Buket ERTURK SENGEL, Canan CİMSİT, Hande PERK GURUN, Çiğdem APAYDIN KAYA, Volkan KORTEN
{"title":"RT-PCR与胸部CT在门诊临床疑似COVID-19患者中的诊断价值","authors":"Elif TÜKENMEZ TİGEN, Buket ERTURK SENGEL, Canan CİMSİT, Hande PERK GURUN, Çiğdem APAYDIN KAYA, Volkan KORTEN","doi":"10.5472/marumj.1379916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To investigate the diagnostic performance between chest computed tomography (CT) and reverse transcription-polymerase
 chain reaction (RT-PCR) in outpatients with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
 Patients and Methods: Between March and June 2020, a total of 812 patients with clinically suspected COVID-19 who underwent both
 chest CT and initial-single RT-PCR on admission to outpatient units were retrospectively enrolled. CT severity-score (CT-SS) was
 calculated and data were matched with PCR results.
 Results: Of 812 patients, 54% (439/812) had positive RT-PCR results, and 47% (425/812) had a positive chest CT scan. With RT-PCR
 results as reference, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy of chest CT in defining COVID-19 infection were 60%, (95% CI 56-65%,
 265/439 patients), 57% (95% CI 52-62%, 213/373), 59% (95% CI 55-62%, 478/812), respectively. Three hundred eighty-seven (47%)
 patients had no CT findings, 380/812 (46.8%) had mild, 45/812 (5.5%) had moderate, and no patients in the severe group
 Conclusion: Chest CT did not show high sensitivity for the diagnosis of COVID-19 for outpatients. We suggest RT-PCR should be
 the primary diagnostic tool. Chest CT might be considered if there is a strong clinical suspicion with repeatedly negative RT-PCR test
 results, ensuring infection prevention and control measures can be preserved.","PeriodicalId":43341,"journal":{"name":"Marmara Medical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic performance between RT-PCR and chest CT in outpatients with clinically suspected COVID-19\",\"authors\":\"Elif TÜKENMEZ TİGEN, Buket ERTURK SENGEL, Canan CİMSİT, Hande PERK GURUN, Çiğdem APAYDIN KAYA, Volkan KORTEN\",\"doi\":\"10.5472/marumj.1379916\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To investigate the diagnostic performance between chest computed tomography (CT) and reverse transcription-polymerase
 chain reaction (RT-PCR) in outpatients with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
 Patients and Methods: Between March and June 2020, a total of 812 patients with clinically suspected COVID-19 who underwent both
 chest CT and initial-single RT-PCR on admission to outpatient units were retrospectively enrolled. CT severity-score (CT-SS) was
 calculated and data were matched with PCR results.
 Results: Of 812 patients, 54% (439/812) had positive RT-PCR results, and 47% (425/812) had a positive chest CT scan. With RT-PCR
 results as reference, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy of chest CT in defining COVID-19 infection were 60%, (95% CI 56-65%,
 265/439 patients), 57% (95% CI 52-62%, 213/373), 59% (95% CI 55-62%, 478/812), respectively. Three hundred eighty-seven (47%)
 patients had no CT findings, 380/812 (46.8%) had mild, 45/812 (5.5%) had moderate, and no patients in the severe group
 Conclusion: Chest CT did not show high sensitivity for the diagnosis of COVID-19 for outpatients. We suggest RT-PCR should be
 the primary diagnostic tool. Chest CT might be considered if there is a strong clinical suspicion with repeatedly negative RT-PCR test
 results, ensuring infection prevention and control measures can be preserved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43341,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Marmara Medical Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Marmara Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5472/marumj.1379916\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Marmara Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5472/marumj.1379916","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨胸部计算机断层扫描(CT)与逆转录聚合酶(rase)的诊断价值;链式反应(RT-PCR)在门诊疑似冠状病毒病2019 (COVID-19)中的应用。 患者和方法:在2020年3月至6月期间,共有812例临床疑似COVID-19患者接受了 回顾性纳入门诊入院时的胸部CT和初始单次RT-PCR。CT严重程度评分(CT- ss)为 计算和数据与PCR结果吻合。 结果:812例患者中,54%(439/812)的RT-PCR结果呈阳性,47%(425/812)的胸部CT扫描呈阳性。用rt - pcr # x0D;结果作为参考,胸部CT诊断COVID-19感染的敏感性、特异性、准确性为60%,(95% CI 56 ~ 65%, 265/439例患者),57% (95% CI 52-62%, 213/373), 59% (95% CI 55-62%, 478/812)。387 (47%) 未见CT表现,轻度380/812例(46.8%),中度45/812例(5.5%),重度组无患者;结论:胸部CT对门诊患者COVID-19的诊断敏感性不高。我们建议RT-PCR应该 主诊断工具。如果临床怀疑强烈且反复出现RT-PCR阴性,可考虑胸部CT检查 结果:确保感染防控措施得以保留。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Diagnostic performance between RT-PCR and chest CT in outpatients with clinically suspected COVID-19
Objective: To investigate the diagnostic performance between chest computed tomography (CT) and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in outpatients with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients and Methods: Between March and June 2020, a total of 812 patients with clinically suspected COVID-19 who underwent both chest CT and initial-single RT-PCR on admission to outpatient units were retrospectively enrolled. CT severity-score (CT-SS) was calculated and data were matched with PCR results. Results: Of 812 patients, 54% (439/812) had positive RT-PCR results, and 47% (425/812) had a positive chest CT scan. With RT-PCR results as reference, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy of chest CT in defining COVID-19 infection were 60%, (95% CI 56-65%, 265/439 patients), 57% (95% CI 52-62%, 213/373), 59% (95% CI 55-62%, 478/812), respectively. Three hundred eighty-seven (47%) patients had no CT findings, 380/812 (46.8%) had mild, 45/812 (5.5%) had moderate, and no patients in the severe group Conclusion: Chest CT did not show high sensitivity for the diagnosis of COVID-19 for outpatients. We suggest RT-PCR should be the primary diagnostic tool. Chest CT might be considered if there is a strong clinical suspicion with repeatedly negative RT-PCR test results, ensuring infection prevention and control measures can be preserved.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Marmara Medical Journal
Marmara Medical Journal MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Marmara Medical Journal, Marmara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi tarafından yılda üç kere yayımlanan multidisipliner bir dergidir. Bu dergide tıbbın tüm alanlarına ait orijinal araştırma makaleleri, olgu sunumları ve derlemeler İngilizce veya Türkçe olarak yer alır.
期刊最新文献
The impact of right ventricular energy failure on the results of pulmonary endarterectomy and balloon pulmonary angioplasty in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension Management of staple line leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: Single-center experience Effects of virtual reality usage on kappa angle, accommodation, pupil, depth perception, and examination of the relationship of these parameters with discomfort perception Combined Mustardé and Furnas type otoplasty with minimal conchal cartilage excision A case of granulomatosis of polyangiitis presenting with COVID-19 infection: False-positivity or co-existence?
×
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