Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32789807›Full record

ArticleEmergency radiology2020

A low-dose chest CT protocol for the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia: a prospective study.

Seyed Mohammad Hossein Tabatabaei, Hamidreza Talari, Ali Gholamrezanezhad, Bagher Farhood, Habibollah Rahimi, Reza Razzaghi, Narges Mehri, Hamid Rajebi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Is it necessary to define new diagnostic reference levels during pandemics like the Covid19-?Radiation physics and chemistry (Oxford, England : 1993) · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. COVID-19 pneumonia: lessons learned, challenges, and preparing for the future.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Incidental Pulmonary Nodules - What Do We Know in 2022.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2022
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Seyed Mohammad Hossein TabatabaeiDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
Hamidreza TalariDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
Ali GholamrezanezhadDivision of Emergency Radiology, Department of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Bagher FarhoodDepartment of Medical Physics and Radiology, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
Habibollah RahimiDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
Reza RazzaghiDepartment of Infectious Diseases, School of Medicine, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
Narges MehriDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
Hamid RajebiDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. hamid.rajebi@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0852-1364

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe increasing trend of chest CT utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic necessitates novel protocols with reduced dose and maintained diagnostic accuracy. We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of 30-mAs chest CT protocol in comparison with a 150-mAs standard-dose routine protocol for imaging of COVID-19 pneumonia.

methodsUpon IRB approval, consecutive laboratory-confirmed positive COVID-19 patients aged 50 years or older who were referred for chest CT scan and had same-day normal CXR were invited to participate in this prospective study. First, a standard-dose chest CT scan (150 mAs) was performed. Only if typical COVID-19 pneumonia features were identified, then a low-dose CT (30 mAs) was done immediately. Diagnostic accuracy of low-dose and standard-dose CT in the detection of typical COVID-19 pneumonia features were compared.

resultsTwenty patients with a mean age of 64.20 ± 13.8 were enrolled in the study. There was excellent intrareader agreement in detecting typical findings of COVID-19 pneumonia between low-dose and standard-dose (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.98-0.99, P values < 0.001 all readers). The mean effective dose values in standard- and low-dose groups were 6.60 ± 1.47 and 1.80 ± 0.42 mSv, respectively. Also, absolute cancer risk per mean cumulative effective dose values obtained from the standard- and low-dose CT examinations were 2.71 × 10

conclusionsAccording to our study, it was found that proposed low-dose CT chest protocol is reliable in detecting COVID-19 pneumonia in daily practice with significant reduction in radiation dose and estimated cancer risk.

Indexed as

AgedBetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19FemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsPneumonia, ViralProspective StudiesRadiation DosageRadiography, ThoracicSARS-CoV-2Tomography, X-Ray ComputedCancer riskComputed tomographyCOVID-19 pneumoniaDiagnosisLow-dose

Identifiers

PMID32789807
PMCPMC7424559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.