Abstract
Background: The lung is one of the major organs affected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Lung CT scan and RT-PCR are the most valuable diagnostic methods in the early diagnosis and management of COVID-19. Due to the possible inconsistency of the false-negative results for the RT-PCR test, in our study, we aimed to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of lung CT-scan as an accurate diagnostic method of COVID-19.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients suspected of COVID-19 and referred to Shahid Beheshti Hospital in Qom city from February 26 to April 13, 2020, were enrolled. For a definitive diagnosis of COVID-19, chest CT scan and RT-PCR testing was performed for 644 patients, and both sensitivity and specificity of lung CT scan were evaluated.
Results: According to the findings, and comparing to the RT-PCR test as the gold standard, sensitivity, specificity as well as, positive predictive and negative predictive values of lung CT-scan were found as follow; 94.47% (95% CI: 90.73 - 97.02%), 24.71% (95% CI: 20.70 - 29.07%), 40.73% (95% CI: 36.58 - 44.99%), 89.08% (95% CI: 82.4 - 94.05%), respectively.
Conclusion: According to the findings, the lung CT scan has a better diagnostic value than RTPCR in symptomatic patients who were referred to the hospital for COVID-19 diagnosis. Performing lung CT-scan in patients with negative RT-PCR tests should be assessed.
Keywords: COVID-19, CT scan, RT-PCR, diagnosis, sensitivity, specificity.
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-65775-7_3]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017] [PMID: 31978945]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.1097] [PMID: 31999307]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40249-020-00646-x] [PMID: 32183901]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.2565] [PMID: 32083643]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nmni.2020.100676] [PMID: 32292589]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.imlet.2020.05.002] [PMID: 32473971]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.01.022] [PMID: 32006691]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5] [PMID: 31986264]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2002032] [PMID: 32109013]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7] [PMID: 32007143]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41569-020-0360-5] [PMID: 32139904]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2016.03.003] [PMID: 27012512]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30154-9] [PMID: 31986261]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.4783] [PMID: 32219428]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2106] [PMID: 32302058]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200280] [PMID: 32031481]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/ryct.2020200034] [PMID: 33778547]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200370] [PMID: 32053470]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2021.04.004] [PMID: 33861993]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.765975] [PMID: 34820400]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200230] [PMID: 32017661]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200527] [PMID: 32105562]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.2020200159] [PMID: 33095680]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2021.04.010] [PMID: 33975783]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.567672] [PMID: 33072703]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200236] [PMID: 32003646]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200432] [PMID: 32073353]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200642] [PMID: 32101510]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.11.20021493]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06022-5] [PMID: 32222812]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200463] [PMID: 32077789]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1808] [PMID: 32398230]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2020.06.001] [PMID: 32571748]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07863-4] [PMID: 33871709]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2020.09.012] [PMID: 33045476]