ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2020
Chest CT scan features from 302 patients with COVID-19 in Jordan.
Article in European journal of radiology open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting the COVID-19 Patients Status Using Chest CT Scan Findings: A Risk Assessment Model Based on Decision Tree Analysis.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Article
- Development and external validation of a mixed-effects deep learning model to diagnose COVID-19 from CT imaging.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Role of High Resolution Computed Tomography chest in the diagnosis and evaluation of COVID -19 patients -A systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of radiology open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo study non-enhanced computer tomographic features of chest imaging in 302 patients with Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Jordan. MATERIAL AND
methodA retrospective analysis of non-enhanced computer tomographic scans has been performed in the main center for patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in Prince Hamzah Hospital for those scanned from 13th of March 2020 to 13th of May 2020. Included scans were routinely performed during 24-hs of admission apart from having respiratory complaint. CT protocol included non-enhanced 1 mm slice thickness by Philips Brilliance Big Bore scanner (Philips; Amsterdam, Netherlands).All computer tomographic scans were reviewed by two senior radiologists with more than 8 years of experience each and senior registrar.Several factors have been thoroughly studied including patient age, gender, positive versus negative pulmonary findings, laterality of lung involvement, lobar distribution, pattern of pulmonary changes on initial and follow-up scans.
resultsThe total number of patients evaluated was 302. There were 188 men and 114 women studied. Among the totally studied 302 cases; 181 cases (59.9 %) showed no pulmonary changes.Positive findings were present in 121 patients with a total number of 191 computer tomographic scans including initial and follow-up scans. Positive findings were present in 51 female and 70 male patients (age range, 12-87 years; mean age ± standard deviation, 46.1 ± 16.5).Bilateral disease was more frequently encountered presented in 86 cases (71.1 %), while unilateral disease showed two times more predilection for the right lung compared to the left. The incidence of lobar involvement in descending order: right lower (75.2 %), left lower (71.9 %), right upper (62.8 %), left upper (60.3 %) and right middle (50.4 %). The incidence of the affected lobes on the initial scans were as follow: one lobe (24 %), two lobes (10.7 %), three lobes (9.1 %), four lobes (16.5 %) five lobes (36.4 %). In cases with single lobar involvement (24 %); the left upper and right middle lobes showed lowest incidence of involvement accounting for 10.3 % & 13.8 %, respectively; on the other hand, in cases with four lobar involvement (16.5 %); the right middle lobe was most commonly spared in two third of cases (63.2 %).Several initial patterns of the pulmonary changes resulting from Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) were present with a descending order; ground-glass pattern (96.7 %), lenticular pattern (32.2 %), Halo sign (15.7 % %), rounded (14.9 %), nodular (10.7 %), ground-glass with consolidation (8.3 %), tree-in-bud (1.7 %) and pleural effusion (1.7 %). Pathologically-enlarged lymph node was not a feature of COVID-19.The total number of patients with positive findings having follow-up scans was 57 including single (45 patients) versus two (12 patients) follow-up scans. Initial follow up scans showed regression and progression of the pulmonary changes in 35 and 22 patients, respectively.A remarkable pattern was seen in almost all regressed cases that showed patchy reticular pattern changes with septal thickening which was referred to "pulmonary synapses" (34 patients) with only one patient showed complete resolution of the parenchymal changes. Patterns seen in progressed cases were lenticular ground-glass (63.6 %) vs patchy ground-glass (36.4 %) patterns.
conclusionComputer tomographic scan of the chest is a principal diagnostic measure for Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The pulmonary changes showed more propensity being bilateral disease and affecting the lower lobes, while the right middle lobe was the least likely involvement. Several pattern of pulmonary changes can be seen on initial scans including ground glass, consolidation, Halo sign, lenticular, nodular, pleural effusion and tree-in-bud patterns. The tree-in-bud is first-time described pattern of COVID-19 in the current article and thought to be an excluding criterion. In follow-up scans; the lenticular and patchy ground-glass patterns were present in cases with disease progression, compared with "pulmonary synapses" pattern encountered in cases with disease regression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.