Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987) · 2021
Diagnostic accuracy of ultra-low-dose chest computed tomography in an emergency department.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tækker Maria, Kristjánsdóttir Björg, Andersen Michael B, Fransen Maja L, Greisen Pernille W, Laursen Christian B, Mussmann Bo, Posth Stefan, Graumann Ole
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study examined whether ultra-low-dose chest computed tomography (ULD-CT) could improve detection of acute chest conditions.
PURPOSE: To determine (i) whether diagnostic accuracy of ULD-CT is superior to supine chest X-ray (sCXR) for acute chest conditions and (ii) the feasibility of ULD-CT in an emergency department.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: From 1 February to 31 July 2019, 91 non-traumatic patients from the Emergency Department were prospectively enrolled in the study if they received an sCXR. An ULD-CT and a non-contrast chest CT (NCCT) scan were then performed. Three radiologists assessed the sCXR and ULD-CT examinations for cardiogenic pulmonary edema, pneumonia, pneumothorax, and pleural effusion. Resources and effort were compared for sCXR and ULD-CT to evaluate feasibility. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated for sCXR and ULD-CT using NCCT as the reference standard.
RESULTS: The mean effective dose of ULD-CT was 0.05±0.01 mSv. For pleural effusion and cardiogenic pulmonary edema, no difference in diagnostic accuracy between ULD-CT and sCXR was observed. For pneumonia and pneumothorax, sensitivities were 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 69-100) and 50% (95% CI 7-93) for ULD-CT and 60% (95% CI 26-88) and 0% (95% CI 0-0) for sCXR, respectively. Median examination time was 10 min for ULD-CT vs. 5 min for sCXR (P<0.001). For ULD-CT 1-2 more staff members were needed compared to sCXR (P<0.001). ULD-CT was rated more challenging to perform than sCXR (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: ULD-CT seems equal or better in detecting acute chest conditions compared to sCXR. However, ULD-CT examinations demand more effort and resources.
PURPOSE: To determine (i) whether diagnostic accuracy of ULD-CT is superior to supine chest X-ray (sCXR) for acute chest conditions and (ii) the feasibility of ULD-CT in an emergency department.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: From 1 February to 31 July 2019, 91 non-traumatic patients from the Emergency Department were prospectively enrolled in the study if they received an sCXR. An ULD-CT and a non-contrast chest CT (NCCT) scan were then performed. Three radiologists assessed the sCXR and ULD-CT examinations for cardiogenic pulmonary edema, pneumonia, pneumothorax, and pleural effusion. Resources and effort were compared for sCXR and ULD-CT to evaluate feasibility. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated for sCXR and ULD-CT using NCCT as the reference standard.
RESULTS: The mean effective dose of ULD-CT was 0.05±0.01 mSv. For pleural effusion and cardiogenic pulmonary edema, no difference in diagnostic accuracy between ULD-CT and sCXR was observed. For pneumonia and pneumothorax, sensitivities were 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 69-100) and 50% (95% CI 7-93) for ULD-CT and 60% (95% CI 26-88) and 0% (95% CI 0-0) for sCXR, respectively. Median examination time was 10 min for ULD-CT vs. 5 min for sCXR (P<0.001). For ULD-CT 1-2 more staff members were needed compared to sCXR (P<0.001). ULD-CT was rated more challenging to perform than sCXR (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: ULD-CT seems equal or better in detecting acute chest conditions compared to sCXR. However, ULD-CT examinations demand more effort and resources.