Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34834455›Full record

ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2021

Quantitative Analysis of Residual COVID-19 Lung CT Features: Consistency among Two Commercial Software.

Vincenza Granata, Stefania Ianniello, Roberta Fusco, Fabrizio Urraro, Davide Pupo, Simona Magliocchetti, Fabrizio Albarello, Paolo Campioni, Massimo Cristofaro, Federica Di Stefano and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Immunotherapy Assessment: A New Paradigm for Radiologists.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

17 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Vincenza GranataDivision of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione Pascale-IRCCS di Napoli, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Stefania IannielloRadiology Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, 00149 Rome, Italy.
Roberta FuscoMedical Oncology Division, Igea SpA, 80013 Naples, Italy.
Fabrizio UrraroDivision of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80125 Naples, Italy.
Davide PupoDivision of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80125 Naples, Italy.
Simona MagliocchettiDivision of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80125 Naples, Italy.
Fabrizio AlbarelloRadiology Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, 00149 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5115-709X
Paolo CampioniRadiology Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, 00149 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7275-7358
Massimo CristofaroRadiology Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, 00149 Rome, Italy.
Federica Di StefanoRadiology Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, 00149 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7449-2392
Nicoletta FuscoRadiology Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, 00149 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5380-3294
Ada PetroneRadiology Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, 00149 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3413-4475
Vincenzo SchininàRadiology Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, 00149 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0079-2522
Alberta VillanacciRadiology Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS, 00149 Rome, Italy.
Francesca GrassiDivision of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80125 Naples, Italy.
Roberta GrassiDivision of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80125 Naples, Italy.
Roberto GrassiDivision of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80125 Naples, Italy.
Istituto Nazionale per le Malattie Infettive Lazzaro Spallanzani · ITUniversity of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITIGEA Clinical Biophysics (Italy) · ITIstituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate two commercial software and their efficacy in the assessment of chest CT sequelae in patients affected by COVID-19 pneumonia, comparing the consistency of tools. MATERIALS AND

methodsIncluded in the study group were 120 COVID-19 patients (56 women and 104 men; 61 years of median age; range: 21-93 years) who underwent chest CT examinations at discharge between 5 March 2020 and 15 March 2021 and again at a follow-up time (3 months; range 30-237 days). A qualitative assessment by expert radiologists in the infectious disease field (experience of at least 5 years) was performed, and a quantitative evaluation using thoracic VCAR software (GE Healthcare, Chicago, Illinois, United States) and a pneumonia module of ANKE ASG-340 CT workstation (HTS Med & Anke, Naples, Italy) was performed. The qualitative evaluation included the presence of ground glass opacities (GGOs) consolidation, interlobular septal thickening, fibrotic-like changes (reticular pattern and/or honeycombing), bronchiectasis, air bronchogram, bronchial wall thickening, pulmonary nodules surrounded by GGOs, pleural and pericardial effusion, lymphadenopathy, and emphysema. A quantitative evaluation included the measurements of GGOs, consolidations, emphysema, residual healthy parenchyma, and total lung volumes for the right and left lung. A chi-square test and non-parametric test were utilized to verify the differences between groups. Correlation coefficients were used to analyze the correlation and variability among quantitative measurements by different computer tools. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed.

resultsThe correlation coefficients showed great variability among the quantitative measurements by different tools when calculated on baseline CT scans and considering all patients. Instead, a good correlation (≥0.6) was obtained for the quantitative GGO, as well as the consolidation volumes obtained by two tools when calculated on baseline CT scans, considering the control group. An excellent correlation (≥0.75) was obtained for the quantitative residual healthy lung parenchyma volume, GGO, consolidation volumes obtained by two tools when calculated on follow-up CT scans, and for residual healthy lung parenchyma and GGO quantification when the percentage change of these volumes were calculated between a baseline and follow-up scan. The highest value of accuracy to identify patients with RT-PCR positive compared to the control group was obtained by a GGO total volume quantification by thoracic VCAR (accuracy = 0.75).

conclusionsComputer aided quantification could be an easy and feasible way to assess chest CT sequelae due to COVID-19 pneumonia; however, a great variability among measurements provided by different tools should be considered.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecomputed tomographyCOVID-19post COVID-19 sequelaequantitative analysis

Identifiers

PMID34834455
PMCPMC8623042
OpenAlexW3210162343

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.