-
Sao Paulo Medical Journal = Revista... 2020A positive real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for SARS CoV-2, from nasopharyngeal swabs, is the current gold standard diagnostic test for... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction versus chest computed tomography for detecting early symptoms of COVID-19. A diagnostic accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
A positive real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for SARS CoV-2, from nasopharyngeal swabs, is the current gold standard diagnostic test for this virus and has sensitivity of 60-70%. Some studies have demonstrated a significant number of false-negative RT-PCR tests while displaying significant tomographic findings, in the early days of symptoms of COVID-19.
OBJECTIVE
To compare accuracy between RT-PCR and computed tomography (CT) for detecting COVID-19 in the first week of its symptoms during the pandemic.
DESIGN AND SETTING
Systematic review of comparative studies of diagnostic accuracy within the Evidence-based Health Program of a federal university in São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
METHODS
A systematic search of the relevant literature was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and LILACS databases, for articles published up to June 6, 2020, relating to studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of RT-PCR and chest CT for COVID-19 diagnoses. The QUADAS 2 tool was used for methodological quality evaluation.
RESULTS
In total, 1204 patients with COVID-19 were evaluated; 1045 had tomographic findings while 755 showed positive RT-PCR for COVID-19. RT-PCR demonstrated 81.4% sensitivity, 100% specificity and 92.3% accuracy. Chest CT demonstrated 95.3% sensitivity, 43.8% specificity and 63.3% accuracy.
CONCLUSION
The high sensitivity and detection rates shown by CT demonstrate that this technique has a high degree of importance in the early stages of the disease. During an outbreak, the higher prevalence of the condition increases the positive predictive value of CT.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/UNGHA in the Open Science Framework.
Topics: Betacoronavirus; Brazil; COVID-19; COVID-19 Testing; COVID-19 Vaccines; Clinical Laboratory Techniques; Coronavirus Infections; Humans; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction; SARS-CoV-2; Sensitivity and Specificity; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 32844901
DOI: 10.1590/1516-3180.2020.034306072020 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2019The opportunity of a multidisciplinary evaluation for the diagnosis of interstitial pneumonias highlighted a major change in the diagnostic approach to diffuse lung...
The opportunity of a multidisciplinary evaluation for the diagnosis of interstitial pneumonias highlighted a major change in the diagnostic approach to diffuse lung disease. The new American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Latin American Thoracic Society guidelines for the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis have reinforced this assumption and have underlined that the exclusion of connective tissue disease related lung involvement is mandatory, with obvious clinical and therapeutic impact. The multidisciplinary team discussion consists in a moment of interaction among the radiologist, pathologist and pulmonologist, also including the rheumatologist when considered necessary, to improve diagnostic agreement and optimize the definition of those cases in which pulmonary involvement may represent the first or prominent manifestation of an autoimmune systemic disease. Moreover, the proposal of classification criteria for interstitial lung disease with autoimmune features (IPAF) represents an effort to define lung involvement in clinically undefined autoimmune conditions. The complexity of autoimmune diseases, and in particular the lack of classification criteria defined for pathologies such as anti-synthetase syndrome, makes the involvement of the rheumatologist essential for the correct interpretation of the autoimmune element and for the application of classification criteria, that could replace clinical pictures initially interpreted as IPAF in defined autoimmune disease, minimizing the risk of misdiagnosis. The aim of this review was to evaluate the available evidence about the efficiency and efficacy of different multidisciplinary team approaches, in order to standardize the professional figures and the core set procedures that should be necessary for a correct approach in diagnosing patients with interstitial lung disease.
PubMed: 31750308
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2019.00246 -
Monaldi Archives For Chest Disease =... Feb 2020To date treatment protocols in Respiratory and or Internal departments across Italy for treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients at hospital...
To date treatment protocols in Respiratory and or Internal departments across Italy for treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients at hospital admission with relapse due to exacerbation do not find adequate support in current guidelines. Here we describe the results of a recent clinical audit, including a systematic review of practices reported in literature and an open discussion comparing these to current real-life procedures. The process was dived into two 8-hour-audits 3 months apart in order to allow work on the field in between meeting and involved 13 participants (3 nurses, 1 physiotherapist, 2 internists and 7 pulmonologists). This document reports the opinions of the experts and their consensus, leading to a bundle of multidisciplinary statements on the use of inhaled drugs for hospitalized COPD patients. Recommendations and topics addressed include: i) monitoring and diagnosis during the first 24 h after admission; ii) treatment algorithm and options (i.e., short and long acting bronchodilators); iii) bronchodilator dosages when switching device or using spacer; iv) flow measurement systems for shifting to LABA+LAMA within 48 h; v) when nebulizers are recommended; vi) use of SMI to deliver LABA+LAMA when patient needs SABA <3 times/day independently from flow limitation; vii) use of DPI and pre-dosed MDI to deliver LABA+LAMA or TRIPLE when patient needs SABA <3 times/day, with inspiratory flow > 30 litres/min; viii) contraindication to use DPI; ix) continuation of LABA-LAMA when patient is already on therapy; x) possible LABA-LAMA dosage increase; xi) use of SABA and/or SAMA in addition to LABA+LABA; xii) use of SABA+SAMA restricted to real need; xiii) reconciliation of drugs in presence of comorbidities; xiv) check of knowledge and skills on inhalation therapy; xv) discharge bundle; xvi) use of MDI and SMI in tracheostomized patients in spontaneous and ventilated breathing.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adrenergic beta-Agonists; Aged, 80 and over; Bronchodilator Agents; Clinical Audit; Disease Progression; Drug Therapy, Combination; Hospitalization; Humans; Italy; Muscarinic Antagonists; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Patient Care Team; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
PubMed: 32072800
DOI: 10.4081/monaldi.2020.1176