Prevalence of COVID-19 Diagnostic Output with Chest Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Temitope Emmanuel Komolafe, John Agbo, Ebenezer Obaloluwa Olaniyi, Kayode Komolafe, Xiaodong Yang
Author Information
  1. Temitope Emmanuel Komolafe: School of Biomedical Engineering(Suzhou), Division of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China.
  2. John Agbo: CAS Key Laboratory for Brain Function and Disease, Department of Neurobiology, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China.
  3. Ebenezer Obaloluwa Olaniyi: Department of Biomedical Engineering, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China.
  4. Kayode Komolafe: Department of Biochemistry, Federal University of Oye Ekiti, Oye 371104, Nigeria.
  5. Xiaodong Yang: Department of Medical Imaging, Suzhou Institute of Biomedical Engineering and Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Suzhou 215163, China.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The pooled prevalence of chest computed tomography (CT) abnormalities and other detailed analysis related to patients' biodata like gender and different age groups have not been previously described for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), thus necessitating this study. Objectives To perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of chest CT, common CT morphological abnormalities, disease prevalence, biodata information, and gender prevalence of patients.
METHODS: Studies were identified by searching PubMed and Science Direct libraries from 1 January 2020 to 30 April 2020. Pooled CT positive rate of COVID-19 and RT-PCR, CT-imaging features, history of exposure, and biodata information were estimated using the quality effect (QE) model.
RESULTS: Out of 36 studies included, the sensitivity was 89% (95% CI: 80-96%) and 98% (95% CI: 90-100%) for chest CT and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), respectively. The pooled prevalence across lesion distribution were 72% (95% CI: 62-80%), 92% (95% CI: 84-97%) for lung lobe, 88% (95% CI: 81-93%) for patients with history of exposure, and 91% (95% CI: 85-96%) for patients with all categories of symptoms. Seventy-six percent (95% CI: 67-83%) had age distribution across four age groups, while the pooled prevalence was higher in the male with 54% (95% CI: 50-57%) and 46% (95% CI: 43-50%) in the female.
CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of RT-PCR was higher than chest CT, and disease prevalence appears relatively higher in the elderly and males than children and females, respectively.

Keywords

References

  1. Ann Oncol. 2020 Jul;31(7):894-901 [PMID: 32224151]
  2. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020 Jun;17(6):701-709 [PMID: 32283052]
  3. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015 Nov;45(Pt A):123-9 [PMID: 26003432]
  4. Radiology. 2020 Jun;295(3):200463 [PMID: 32077789]
  5. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021 Jan;216(1):71-79 [PMID: 32755175]
  6. World J Pediatr. 2020 Jun;16(3):251-259 [PMID: 32193831]
  7. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2020 May;55(5):1169-1174 [PMID: 32134205]
  8. Respir Med. 2020 Jul;168:105980 [PMID: 32364959]
  9. BMJ. 2020 May 22;369:m1966 [PMID: 32444366]
  10. Jpn J Radiol. 2020 Jun;38(6):533-538 [PMID: 32318916]
  11. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 May;214(5):1072-1077 [PMID: 32125873]
  12. Radiology. 2020 Sep;296(3):E145-E155 [PMID: 32301646]
  13. Invest Radiol. 2020 May;55(5):257-261 [PMID: 32091414]
  14. Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Jun;95:106-112 [PMID: 32272262]
  15. Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1539-58 [PMID: 12111919]
  16. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2021 Feb;54(1):54-60 [PMID: 32359943]
  17. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020 May;47(5):1275-1280 [PMID: 32107577]
  18. Radiology. 2020 Apr;295(1):202-207 [PMID: 32017661]
  19. J Transl Med. 2020 Apr 6;18(1):154 [PMID: 32252784]
  20. Curr Med Sci. 2020 Apr;40(2):275-280 [PMID: 32207032]
  21. J Infect. 2020 Jul;81(1):e33-e39 [PMID: 32294504]
  22. J Thorac Imaging. 2020 May;35(3):W90-W93 [PMID: 32195887]
  23. Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Jun;44:346-351 [PMID: 32327245]
  24. Eur Radiol. 2020 Aug;30(8):4417-4426 [PMID: 32279115]
  25. N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 30;382(18):1708-1720 [PMID: 32109013]
  26. Indian J Pediatr. 2020 Apr;87(4):281-286 [PMID: 32166607]
  27. Arch Iran Med. 2020 Apr 01;23(4):272-276 [PMID: 32271602]
  28. Front Public Health. 2020 May 13;8:189 [PMID: 32574292]
  29. J Infect. 2020 Apr;80(4):388-393 [PMID: 32112884]
  30. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 18;155(8):529-36 [PMID: 22007046]
  31. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2020 Jul - Aug;49(4):294-301 [PMID: 32305134]
  32. Acad Radiol. 2020 May;27(5):609-613 [PMID: 32204990]
  33. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2020 May;101(5):263-268 [PMID: 32291197]
  34. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2020 Jun;55(6):1424-1429 [PMID: 32259403]
  35. Radiol Infect Dis. 2020 Jun;7(2):51-54 [PMID: 32309528]
  36. J Med Virol. 2020 Sep;92(9):1525-1532 [PMID: 32167181]
  37. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2021 May;72(2):279-284 [PMID: 32306755]
  38. Eur J Radiol. 2020 Jul;128:109017 [PMID: 32387924]
  39. J Formos Med Assoc. 2020 May;119(5):990-992 [PMID: 32307320]
  40. BMJ. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):629-34 [PMID: 9310563]
  41. J Clin Virol. 2020 Jun;127:104363 [PMID: 32298988]
  42. Eur J Radiol. 2020 May;126:108972 [PMID: 32240913]
  43. Eur Radiol. 2020 Aug;30(8):4407-4416 [PMID: 32215691]
  44. Indian Pediatr. 2020 May 15;57(5):423-426 [PMID: 32255437]
  45. Radiology. 2020 Aug;296(2):E32-E40 [PMID: 32101510]
  46. Radiology. 2020 Aug;296(2):E115-E117 [PMID: 32073353]
  47. Radiology. 2020 Apr;295(1):210-217 [PMID: 32027573]
  48. JAMA. 2020 May 12;323(18):1843-1844 [PMID: 32159775]
  49. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2013 Nov 1;67(11):974-8 [PMID: 23963506]
  50. ACS Cent Sci. 2020 May 27;6(5):591-605 [PMID: 32382657]
  51. J Infect. 2020 Apr;80(4):394-400 [PMID: 32109443]
  52. J Med Virol. 2020 Jul;92(7):797-806 [PMID: 32198776]
  53. Korean J Radiol. 2020 Apr;21(4):494-500 [PMID: 32100485]
  54. Radiology. 2020 Jun;295(3):715-721 [PMID: 32053470]
  55. Radiology. 2020 Aug;296(2):E41-E45 [PMID: 32049601]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.095%CI:prevalenceCTchestagepatientsCOVID-19pooledbiodatadiseaseRT-PCRdistributionhighercomputedtomographyabnormalitiesgendergroupsmeta-analysisinformation2020historyexposuresensitivityrespectivelyacrossBACKGROUND:detailedanalysisrelatedpatients'likedifferentpreviouslydescribedcoronavirus2019thusnecessitatingstudyObjectivesperformevaluatediagnosticperformancecommonmorphologicalMETHODS:StudiesidentifiedsearchingPubMedScienceDirectlibraries1January30AprilPooledpositiverateCT-imagingfeaturesestimatedusingqualityeffectQEmodelRESULTS:36studiesincluded89%80-96%98%90-100%reversetranscription-polymerasechainreactionlesion72%62-80%92%84-97%lunglobe88%81-93%91%85-96%categoriessymptomsSeventy-sixpercent67-83%fourmale54%50-57%46%43-50%femaleCONCLUSIONS:appearsrelativelyelderlymaleschildrenfemalesPrevalenceDiagnosticOutputChestComputedTomography:SystematicReviewMeta-Analysis

Similar Articles

Cited By (2)