Structured reporting of chest CT in COVID-19 pneumonia: a consensus proposal

Natural language processing to convert unstructured COVID-19 chest-CT reports into structured reports

Background

Structured reporting has been demonstrated to increase report completeness and to reduce error rate, also enabling data mining of radiological reports. Still, structured reporting is perceived by radiologists as a fragmented reporting style, limiting their freedom of expression.

Purpose

A deep learning-based natural language processing method was developed to automatically convert unstructured COVID-19 chest CT reports into structured reports.

Methods

Two hundred-two COVID-19 chest CT were retrospectively reviewed by two experienced radiologists, who wrote for each exam a free-form text radiological report and coherently filled the template provided by the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, used as ground-truth. A semi-supervised convolutional neural network was implemented to extract 62 categorical variables from the report. Two iterations were carried-out, the first without fine-tuning, the second one performing a fine-tuning. The performance was measured using the mean accuracy and the F1 mean score. An error analysis was performed to identify errors entirely attributable to incorrect processing of the model.

Results

The algorithm achieved a mean accuracy of 93.7% and an F1 score 93.8% in the first iteration. Most of the errors were exclusively attributable to wrong inference (46%). In the second iteration the model achieved for both parameters 95,8% and percentage of errors attributable to wrong inference decreased to 26%.

Conclusions

The convolutional neural network achieved an optimal performance in the automated conversion of free-form text into structured radiological reports, overcoming all the limitation attributed to structured reporting and finally paving the way for data mining of radiological report.

European Society of Radiology (ESR), dos Santos DP, Kotter E, Mildenberger P, Martí-Bonmatí L. ESR paper on structured reporting in radiology-update 2023

Structured reporting in radiology continues to hold substantial potential to improve the quality of service provided to patients and referring physicians. Despite many physicians' preference for structured reports and various efforts by radiological societies and some vendors, structured reporting has still not been widely adopted in clinical routine.While in many countries national radiological societies have launched initiatives to further promote structured reporting, cross-institutional applications of report templates and incentives for usage of structured reporting are lacking. Various legislative measures have been taken in the USA and the European Union to promote interoperable data formats such as Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) in the context of the EU Health Data Space (EHDS) which will certainly be relevant for the future of structured reporting. Lastly, recent advances in artificial intelligence and large language models may provide innovative and efficient approaches to integrate structured reporting more seamlessly into the radiologists' workflow.The ESR will remain committed to advancing structured reporting as a key component towards more value-based radiology. Practical solutions for structured reporting need to be provided by vendors. Policy makers should incentivize the usage of structured radiological reporting, especially in cross-institutional setting.Critical relevance statement Over the past years, the benefits of structured reporting in radiology have been widely discussed and agreed upon; however, implementation in clinical routine is lacking due-policy makers should incentivize the usage of structured radiological reporting, especially in cross-institutional setting.Key points1. Various national societies have established initiatives for structured reporting in radiology.2. Almost no monetary or structural incentives exist that favor structured reporting.3. A consensus on technical standards for structured reporting is still missing.4. The application of large language models may help structuring radiological reports.5. Policy makers should incentivize the usage of structured radiological reporting.

Knowledge of Community Pharmacists in Saudi Arabia Regarding Human Monkeypox, Its Management, Prevention, and Vaccination: Findings and Implications

Many cases of monkeypox have recently been reported in countries where this disease is not endemic, raising a global health concern. Consequently, healthcare professionals (HCPs), including pharmacists, need to be aware of the disease, its prevention, including the role of vaccines, and its management to reduce transmission. A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was conducted among conveniently sampled community pharmacists in the Qassim region of Saudi Arabia. A total of 189 community pharmacists participated in the study, giving a response rate of 72.97%. From these, 86.77% were male, 51.32% were ≤30 years old, 36.51% were aged between 31-40 years, and 43.39% had 1-5 years of experience as community pharmacists. Their overall knowledge was 17.72 ± 5.56 out of a maximum of 28. The overall rate of correct answers for the knowledge statements was 63.29%, with 52.4% answering ≥50-<75% of the knowledge questions correctly and 31.2% answering ≥75% of the questions correctly. The knowledge subdomain related to diagnosis and clinical characteristics recorded the highest score, with the subdomain relating to causative pathogens and epidemiology recording a lower score. Overall, community pharmacists had moderate knowledge of monkeypox and its clinical management, prevention, and the role of vaccines, which is a concern for the future. Consequently, tailored, flexible, and timely educational interventions are needed to ensure that HCPs, including community pharmacists, are fully equipped with the latest evidence-based knowledge regarding this viral disease to reduce transmission and improve care.

Can a chest HRCT-based crash course on COVID-19 cases make inexperienced thoracic radiologists readily available to face the next pandemic?

OBJECTIVE

To test the inter-reader agreement in assessing lung disease extent, HRCT signs, and Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) categorization between a chest-devoted radiologist (CR) and two HRCT-naïve radiology residents (RR1 and RR2) after the latter attended a COVID-19-based chest high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) "crash course".

METHODS

The course was built by retrospective inclusion of 150 patients who underwent HRCT for COVID-19 pneumonia between November 2020 and January 2021. During a first 10-days-long "training phase", RR1 and RR2 read a pool of 100/150 HRCTs, receiving day-by-day access to CR reports as feedback. In the subsequent 2-days-long "test phase", they were asked to report 50/150 HRCTs with no feedback. Test phase reports of RR1/RR2 were then compared with CR using unweighted or linearly-weighted Cohen's kappa (k) statistic and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

We observed almost perfect agreement in assessing disease extent between RR1-CR (k = 0.83, p < 0.001) and RR2-CR (k = 0.88, p < 0.001). The agreement between RR1-CR and RR2-CR on consolidation, crazy paving pattern, organizing pneumonia (OP) pattern, and pulmonary artery (PA) diameter was substantial (k = 0.65 and k = 0.68), moderate (k = 0.42 and k = 0.51), slight (k = 0.10 and k = 0.20), and good-to-excellent (ICC = 0.87 and ICC = 0.91), respectively. The agreement in providing RSNA categorization was moderate for R1 versus CR (k = 0.56) and substantial for R2 versus CR (k = 0.67).

CONCLUSION

HRCT-naïve readers showed an acceptable overall agreement with CR, supporting the hypothesis that a crash course can be a tool to readily make non-subspecialty radiologists available to cooperate in reading high burden of HRCT examinations during a pandemic/epidemic.

Immunotherapy Assessment: A New Paradigm for Radiologists

Immunotherapy denotes an exemplar change in an oncological setting. Despite the effective application of these treatments across a broad range of tumors, only a minority of patients have beneficial effects. The efficacy of immunotherapy is affected by several factors, including human immunity, which is strongly correlated to genetic features, such as intra-tumor heterogeneity. Classic imaging assessment, based on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which is useful for conventional treatments, has a limited role in immunotherapy. The reason is due to different patterns of response and/or progression during this kind of treatment which differs from those seen during other treatments, such as the possibility to assess the wide spectrum of immunotherapy-correlated toxic effects (ir-AEs) as soon as possible. In addition, considering the unusual response patterns, the limits of conventional response criteria and the necessity of using related immune-response criteria are clear. Radiomics analysis is a recent field of great interest in a radiological setting and recently it has grown the idea that we could identify patients who will be fit for this treatment or who will develop ir-AEs.

Structured reporting of computed tomography in the polytrauma patient assessment: a Delphi consensus proposal

OBJECTIVES

To develop a structured reporting (SR) template for whole-body CT examinations of polytrauma patients, based on the consensus of a panel of emergency radiology experts from the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology.

METHODS

A multi-round Delphi method was used to quantify inter-panelist agreement for all SR sections. Internal consistency for each section and quality analysis in terms of average inter-item correlation were evaluated by means of the Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

The final SR form included 118 items (6 in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, 4 in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, 9 in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and 99 in the "Report" section). The experts' overall mean score and sum of scores were 4.77 (range 1-5) and 257.56 (range 206-270) in the first Delphi round, and 4.96 (range 4-5) and 208.44 (range 200-210) in the second round, respectively. In the second Delphi round, the experts' overall mean score was higher than in the first round, and standard deviation was lower (3.11 in the second round vs 19.71 in the first round), reflecting a higher expert agreement in the second round. Moreover, Cα was higher in the second round than in the first round (0.97 vs 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Our SR template for whole-body CT examinations of polytrauma patients is based on a strong agreement among panel experts in emergency radiology and could improve communication between radiologists and the trauma team.

Behçet's Disease: A Radiological Review of Vascular and Parenchymal Pulmonary Involvement

Behcet's disease (BD) is a chronic systemic inflammatory disorder characterized by underlying chronic vasculitis of both large- and small-caliber vessels. Thoracic involvement in BD can occur with various types of manifestations, which can be detected with contrast-enhanced MSCT scanning. In addition, MR can be useful in diagnosis. Characteristic features are aneurysms of the pulmonary arteries that can cause severe hemoptysis and SVC thrombosis that manifests as SVC syndrome. Other manifestations are aortic and bronchial artery aneurysms, alveolar hemorrhage, pulmonary infarction, and rarely pleural effusion. Achieving the right diagnosis of these manifestations is important for setting the correct therapy and improving the patient's outcome.

Synoptic reporting accuracy for computed tomography pulmonary arteriography among patients suspected of pulmonary embolism

Background

Structured reporting is an efficient and replicable method of presenting diagnostic results that eliminates variability inherent in narrative descriptive reporting and may improve clinical decisions. Synoptic element reporting can generate discrete coded data that then may inform clinical decision support and trigger downstream actions in computerized electronic health records.

Objective

Limited evidence exists for use of synoptic reporting for computed tomography pulmonary arteriography (CTPA) among patients suspected of pulmonary embolism. We reported the accuracy of synoptic reporting for the outcome of pulmonary embolism among patients who presented to an integrated health care system with CTPA performed for suspected pulmonary embolism.

Methods

Structured radiology reports with embedded synoptic elements were implemented for all CTPA examinations on March 1, 2018. Four hundred CTPA reports between January 4, 2019 and July 30, 2020 (200 reports each for which synoptic reporting recorded the presence or absence of pulmonary embolism [PE]) were selected at random. One non-diagnostic study was excluded from analysis. We then assessed the accuracy of synoptic reporting compared with the gold standard of manual chart review.

Results

Synoptic reporting and manual review agreed in 99.2% of patients undergoing CTPA for suspected PE, agreed on the presence of PE in 196 of 199 (98.5%) cases, the absence of PE in 200 of 200 (100%) cases with a sensitivity of 87.6% (76.1-96.1) a specificity of 99.9% (99.7%-100%), a positive predictive value of 99.5% (98.1-100), and a negative predictive value of 98% (95.7%-99.5%).

Conclusion

The overall rate of agreement was 99.2%, but we observed an unacceptable false-negative rate for clinical reliance on synoptic element reporting in isolation from dictated reports.

High-dimensional multinomial multiclass severity scoring of COVID-19 pneumonia using CT radiomics features and machine learning algorithms

We aimed to construct a prediction model based on computed tomography (CT) radiomics features to classify COVID-19 patients into severe-, moderate-, mild-, and non-pneumonic. A total of 1110 patients were studied from a publicly available dataset with 4-class severity scoring performed by a radiologist (based on CT images and clinical features). The entire lungs were segmented and followed by resizing, bin discretization and radiomic features extraction. We utilized two feature selection algorithms, namely bagging random forest (BRF) and multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), each coupled to a classifier, namely multinomial logistic regression (MLR), to construct multiclass classification models. The dataset was divided into 50% (555 samples), 20% (223 samples), and 30% (332 samples) for training, validation, and untouched test datasets, respectively. Subsequently, nested cross-validation was performed on train/validation to select the features and tune the models. All predictive power indices were reported based on the testing set. The performance of multi-class models was assessed using precision, recall, F1-score, and accuracy based on the 4 × 4 confusion matrices. In addition, the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) for multi-class classifications were calculated and compared for both models. Using BRF, 23 radiomic features were selected, 11 from first-order, 9 from GLCM, 1 GLRLM, 1 from GLDM, and 1 from shape. Ten features were selected using the MARS algorithm, namely 3 from first-order, 1 from GLDM, 1 from GLRLM, 1 from GLSZM, 1 from shape, and 3 from GLCM features. The mean absolute deviation, skewness, and variance from first-order and flatness from shape, and cluster prominence from GLCM features and Gray Level Non Uniformity Normalize from GLRLM were selected by both BRF and MARS algorithms. All selected features by BRF or MARS were significantly associated with four-class outcomes as assessed within MLR (All p values < 0.05). BRF + MLR and MARS + MLR resulted in pseudo-R2 prediction performances of 0.305 and 0.253, respectively. Meanwhile, there was a significant difference between the feature selection models when using a likelihood ratio test (p value = 0.046). Based on confusion matrices for BRF + MLR and MARS + MLR algorithms, the precision was 0.856 and 0.728, the recall was 0.852 and 0.722, whereas the accuracy was 0.921 and 0.861, respectively. AUCs (95% CI) for multi-class classification were 0.846 (0.805-0.887) and 0.807 (0.752-0.861) for BRF + MLR and MARS + MLR algorithms, respectively. Our models based on the utilization of radiomic features, coupled with machine learning were able to accurately classify patients according to the severity of pneumonia, thus highlighting the potential of this emerging paradigm in the prognostication and management of COVID-19 patients.

Structured Reporting in Radiological Settings: Pitfalls and Perspectives

Objective: The aim of this manuscript is to give an overview of structured reporting in radiological settings. Materials and Method: This article is a narrative review on structured reporting in radiological settings. Particularly, limitations and future perspectives are analyzed. RESULTS: The radiological report is a communication tool for the referring physician and the patients. It was conceived as a free text report (FTR) to allow radiologists to have their own individuality in the description of the radiological findings. However, this form could suffer from content, style, and presentation discrepancies, with a probability of transferring incorrect radiological data. Quality, datafication/quantification, and accessibility represent the three main goals in moving from FTRs to structured reports (SRs). In fact, the quality is related to standardization, which aims to improve communication and clarification. Moreover, a “structured” checklist, which allows all the fundamental items for a particular radiological study to be reported and permits the connection of the radiological data with clinical features, allowing a personalized medicine. With regard to accessibility, since radiological reports can be considered a source of research data, SR allows data mining to obtain new biomarkers and to help the development of new application domains, especially in the field of radiomics. Conclusions: Structured reporting could eliminate radiologist individuality, allowing a standardized approach.

Complications Risk Assessment and Imaging Findings of Thermal Ablation Treatment in Liver Cancers: What the Radiologist Should Expect

One of the major fields of application of ablation treatment is liver tumors. With respect to HCC, ablation treatments are considered as upfront treatments in patients with early-stage disease, while in colorectal liver metastases (CLM), they can be employed as an upfront treatment or in association with surgical resection. The main prognostic feature of ablation is the tumor size, since the goal of the treatment is the necrosis of all viable tumor tissue with an adequate tumor-free margin. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are the most employed ablation techniques. Ablation therapies in HCC and liver metastases have presented a challenge to radiologists, who need to assess response to determine complication-related treatment. Complications, defined as any unexpected variation from a procedural course, and adverse events, defined as any actual or potential injury related to the treatment, could occur either during the procedure or afterwards. To date, RFA and MWA have shown no statistically significant differences in mortality rates or major or minor complications. To reduce the rate of major complications, patient selection and risk assessment are essential. To determine the right cost-benefit ratio for the ablation method to be used, it is necessary to identify patients at high risk of infections, coagulation disorders and previous abdominal surgery interventions. Based on risk assessment, during the procedure as part of surveillance, the radiologists should pay attention to several complications, such as vascular, biliary, mechanical and infectious. Multiphase CT is an imaging tool chosen in emergency settings. The radiologist should report technical success, treatment efficacy, and complications. The complications should be assessed according to well-defined classification systems, and these complications should be categorized consistently according to severity and time of occurrence.

CT evaluation of lung infiltrates in the two months preceding the Coronavirus disease 19 pandemic in Canton Ticino (Switzerland): were there suspicious cases before the official first case?

PURPOSE

The main objective of this study was to assess the presence of pulmonary infiltrates with computed tomography (CT) appearance compatible with infection by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), in Canton Ticino in the 2 months preceding the first official case. Secondary aims were to compare the classification of infiltrates in the same time frame in 2020 and 2019; to compare the number of chest CT scans in the same period; to search for pathological confirmation of the virus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Chest CT scans performed between January 1 and February 24 in 2019 and 2020 were collected and classified by COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS). Pathological presence of the virus was searched for when appropriate material was available.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 881 patients. Among the CO-RADS 3 and 4 categories, 30 patients had pneumonitis of unknown etiology. Pathological specimens were available in six patients but they were negative for COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Before the first official case of COVID-19 infection, in Canton Ticino there were about 30 cases of pneumonitis of uncertain origin, with CT appearance compatible with infection by COVID-19, but with no confirmation of the disease. The number of chest CT scans in the first two months of 2020 was > 12% compared to 2019.

Structured reporting of x-ray mammography in the first diagnosis of breast cancer: a Delphi consensus proposal

Background

Radiology is an essential tool in the management of a patient. The aim of this manuscript was to build structured report (SR) Mammography based in Breast Cancer.

Methods

A working team of 16 experts (group A) was composed to create a SR for Mammography Breast Cancer. A further working group of 4 experts (group B), blinded to the activities of the group A, was composed to assess the quality and clinical usefulness of the SR final draft. Modified Delphi process was used to assess level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation.

Results

The final SR version was built by including n = 2 items in Personal Data, n = 4 items in Setting, n = 2 items in Comparison with previous breast examination, n = 19 items in Anamnesis and clinical context; n = 10 items in Technique; n = 1 item in Radiation dose; n = 5 items Parenchymal pattern; n = 28 items in Description of the finding; n = 12 items in Diagnostic categories and Report and n = 1 item in Conclusions. The overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.9 and 807 in the second round. The Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was 0.82 in the second round. About the quality evaluation, the overall mean score of the experts was 3.3. The Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was 0.90.

Conclusions

Structured reporting improves the quality, clarity and reproducibility of reports across departments, cities, countries and internationally and will assist patient management and improve breast health care and facilitate research.

Development and Validation of the Acute PNeumonia Early Assessment Score for Safely Discharging Low-Risk SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients from the Emergency Department

A continuous demand for assistance and an overcrowded emergency department (ED) require early and safe discharge of low-risk severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-infected patients. We developed (n = 128) and validated (n = 330) the acute PNeumonia early assessment (aPNea) score in a tertiary hospital and preliminarily tested the score on an external secondary hospital (n = 97). The score's performance was compared to that of the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2). The composite outcome of either death or oral intubation within 30 days from admission occurred in 101 and 28 patients in the two hospitals, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve of the aPNea model was 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.78-0.93) and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.89) for the development and validation cohorts, respectively. The aPNea score discriminated low-risk patients better than NEWS2 at a 10% outcome probability, corresponding to five cut-off points and one cut-off point, respectively. aPNea's cut-off reduced the number of unnecessary hospitalizations without missing outcomes by 27% (95% CI, 9-41) in the validation cohort. NEWS2 was not significant. In the external cohort, aPNea's cut-off had 93% sensitivity (95% CI, 83-102) and a 94% negative predictive value (95% CI, 87-102). In conclusion, the aPNea score appears to be appropriate for discharging low-risk SARS-CoV-2-infected patients from the ED.

Structured reporting of computed tomography in the staging of colon cancer: a Delphi consensus proposal

BACKGROUND

Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports in colon cancer during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist, members of multidisciplinary teams and patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation.

RESULTS

The final SR version was built by including n = 18 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n = 7 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n = 9 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section and n = 29 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 63 items were included in the final version of the SR. Both in the first and second round, all sections received a higher than good rating: a mean value of 4.6 and range 3.6-4.9 in the first round; a mean value of 5.0 and range 4.9-5 in the second round. In the first round, Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was a questionable 0.61. In the first round, the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.6 (range 1-5) and 1111 (mean value 74.07, STD 4.85), respectively. In the second round, Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was an acceptable 0.70. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.9 (range 4-5) and 1108 (mean value 79.14, STD 1.83), respectively. The overall mean score obtained by the experts in the second round was higher than the overall mean score of the first round, with a lower standard deviation value to underline greater agreement among the experts for the structured report reached in this round.

CONCLUSIONS

A wide implementation of SR is of critical importance in order to offer referring physicians and patients optimum quality of service and to provide researchers with the best quality data in the context of big data exploitation of available clinical data. Implementation is a complex procedure, requiring mature technology to successfully address the multiple challenges of user-friendliness, organization and interoperability.

Structured Reporting of Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance in the Staging of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Delphi Consensus Proposal

Background: Structured reporting (SR) in radiology has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR)-based reports in pancreatic adenocarcinoma during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist and members of multidisciplinary teams. Materials and Methods: A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the CT-SR and MRI-SR, assessing a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. Results: The final CT-SR version was built by including n = 16 items in the “Patient Clinical Data” section, n = 11 items in the “Clinical Evaluation” section, n = 7 items in the “Imaging Protocol” section, and n = 18 items in the “Report” section. Overall, 52 items were included in the final version of the CT-SR. The final MRI-SR version was built by including n = 16 items in the “Patient Clinical Data” section, n = 11 items in the “Clinical Evaluation” section, n = 8 items in the “Imaging Protocol” section, and n = 14 items in the “Report” section. Overall, 49 items were included in the final version of the MRI-SR. In the first round for CT-SR, all sections received more than a good rating. The overall mean score of the experts was 4.85. The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.85. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts was 4.87, and the Cα correlation coefficient was 0.94. In the first round, for MRI-SR, all sections received more than a good rating. The overall mean score of the experts was 4.73. The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.82. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts was 4.91, and the Cα correlation coefficient was 0.93. Conclusions: The CT-SR and MRI-SR are based on a multi-round consensus-building Delphi exercise derived from the multidisciplinary agreement of expert radiologists in order to obtain more appropriate communication tools for referring physicians.

The role of chest imaging in the diagnosis, management, and monitoring of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed a major public health crisis all over the world. The role of chest imaging, especially computed tomography (CT), has evolved during the pandemic paralleling the accumulation of scientific evidence. In the early stage of the pandemic, the performance of chest imaging for COVID-19 has widely been debated especially in the context of comparison to real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Current evidence is against the use of chest imaging for routine screening of COVID-19 contrary to the initial expectations. It still has an integral role to play, however, in its work up and staging, especially when assessing complications or disease progression. Chest CT is gold standard imaging modality for COVID-19 pneumonia; in some situations, chest X-ray or ultrasound may be an effective alternative. The most important role of radiologists in this context is to be able to identify those patients at greatest risk of imminent clinical decompensation by learning to stratify cases of COVID-19 on the basis of radiologic imaging in the most efficient and timely fashion possible. The present availability of multiple and more refined CT grading systems and classification is now making this task easier and thereby contributing to the recent improvements achieved in COVID-19 treatment and outcomes. In this article, evidence of chest imaging regarding diagnosis, management and monitoring of COVID-19 will be chronologically reviewed.

Computed Tomography Structured Reporting in the Staging of Lymphoma: A Delphi Consensus Proposal

Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports for lymphoma patients during the staging phase to improve communication between radiologists, members of multidisciplinary teams, and patients. A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. The Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. The final SR version was divided into four sections: (a) Patient Clinical Data, (b) Clinical Evaluation, (c) Imaging Protocol, and (d) Report, including n = 13 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n = 8 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n = 9 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and n = 32 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 62 items were included in the final version of the SR. A dedicated section of significant images was added as part of the report. In the first Delphi round, all sections received more than a good rating (≥3). The overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.4 (range 1-5) and 1524 (mean value of 101.6 and standard deviation of 11.8). The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.89 in the first round. In the second Delphi round, all sections received more than an excellent rating (≥4). The overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for structured report were 4.9 (range 3-5) and 1694 (mean value of 112.9 and standard deviation of 4.0). The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.87 in this round. The highest overall means value, highest sum of scores of the panelists, and smallest standard deviation values of the evaluations in this round reflect the increase of the internal consistency and agreement among experts in the second round compared to first round. The accurate statement of imaging data given to referring physicians is critical for patient care; the information contained affects both the decision-making process and the subsequent treatment. The radiology report is the most important source of clinical imaging information. It conveys critical information about the patient's health and the radiologist's interpretation of medical findings. It also communicates information to the referring physicians and records this information for future clinical and research use. The present SR was generated based on a multi-round consensus-building Delphi exercise and uses standardized terminology and structures, in order to adhere to diagnostic/therapeutic recommendations and facilitate enrolment in clinical trials, to reduce any ambiguity that may arise from non-conventional language, and to enable better communication between radiologists and clinicians.

Structured Reporting of Lung Cancer Staging: A Consensus Proposal

Background: Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming necessary and has recently been recognized by major scientific societies. This study aimed to build CT-based structured reports for lung cancer during the staging phase, in order to improve communication between radiologists, members of the multidisciplinary team and patients. Materials and Methods: A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A modified Delphi exercise was used to build the structural report and to assess the level of agreement for all the report sections. The Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to perform a quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. Results: The final SR version was built by including 16 items in the “Patient Clinical Data” section, 4 items in the “Clinical Evaluation” section, 8 items in the “Exam Technique” section, 22 items in the “Report” section, and 5 items in the “Conclusion” section. Overall, 55 items were included in the final version of the SR. The overall mean of the scores of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.5 (range 1–5) and 631 (mean value 67.54, STD 7.53), respectively, in the first round. The items of the structured report with higher accordance in the first round were primary lesion features, lymph nodes, metastasis and conclusions. The overall mean of the scores of the experts and the sum of scores for staging in the structured report were 4.7 (range 4–5) and 807 (mean value 70.11, STD 4.81), respectively, in the second round. The Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was 0.89 in the first round and 0.92 in the second round for staging in the structured report. Conclusions: The wide implementation of SR is critical for providing referring physicians and patients with the best quality of service, and for providing researchers with the best quality of data in the context of the big data exploitation of the available clinical data. Implementation is complex, requiring mature technology to successfully address pending user-friendliness, organizational and interoperability challenges.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the selection of chest imaging modalities and reporting systems: a survey of Italian radiologists

PURPOSE

Chest imaging modalities play a key role for the management of patient with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Unfortunately, there is no consensus on the optimal chest imaging approach in the evaluation of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, and radiology departments tend to use different approaches. Thus, the main objective of this survey was to assess how chest imaging modalities have been used during the different phases of the first COVID-19 wave in Italy, and which diagnostic technique and reporting system would have been preferred based on the experience gained during the pandemic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The questionnaire of the survey consisted of 26 questions. The link to participate in the survey was sent to all members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM).

RESULTS

The survey gathered responses from 716 SIRM members. The most notable result was that the most used and preferred chest imaging modality to assess/exclude/monitor COVID-19 pneumonia during the different phases of the first COVID-19 wave was computed tomography (51.8% to 77.1% of participants). Additionally, while the narrative report was the most used reporting system (55.6% of respondents), one-third of participants would have preferred to utilize structured reporting systems.

CONCLUSION

This survey shows that the participants' responses did not properly align with the imaging guidelines for managing COVID-19 that have been made by several scientific, including SIRM. Therefore, there is a need for continuing education to keep radiologists up to date and aware of the advantages and limitations of the chest imaging modalities and reporting systems.

Covid-19 infection in cancer patients: the management in a diagnostic unit

Background

COVID-19 infection is particularly aggressive in frail patients, as cancer patients. Therefore, the more suitable management of the oncological patient requires a multidisciplinary assessment, to identify which patients should be treated, as inpatients or outpatients, and which treatments can be procrastinated.

Conclusions

The role of radiologist is crucial, and, all cancer patients who need an imaging evaluation will need to be studied, using the most appropriate imaging tools related to the clinical question and paying a special attention to preserve public health. Guidelines are necessary in the correct organization of a radiology unit to manage patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection, and whenever possible, a satellite radiography center with dedicated equipment should be used to decrease the transmission risk.

A Pictorial Review of the Role of Imaging in the Detection, Management, Histopathological Correlations, and Complications of COVID-19 Pneumonia

Imaging plays an important role in the detection of coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia in both managing the disease and evaluating the complications. Imaging with chest computed tomography (CT) can also have a potential predictive and prognostic role in COVID-19 patient outcomes. The aim of this pictorial review is to describe the role of imaging with chest X-ray (CXR), lung ultrasound (LUS), and CT in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19 pneumonia, the current indications, the scores proposed for each modality, the advantages/limitations of each modality and their role in detecting complications, and the histopathological correlations.

Chest CT in COVID-19 patients: Structured vs conventional reporting

Purpose

To assess clinician satisfaction with structured (SR) and conventional (CR) radiological reports for chest CT exams in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, objectively comparing both reporting strategies.

Method

We retrospectively included 68 CTs (61 patients) with COVID-19. CRs were collected from the digital database while corresponding SRs were written by an expert radiologist, including a sign checklist, severity score index and final impressions. New CRs were prepared for a random subset (n = 10) of cases, to allow comparisons in reporting time and word count. CRs were analyzed to record severity score and final impressions inclusion. A random subset of 40 paired CRs and SRs was evaluated by two clinicians to assess, using a Likert scale, readability, comprehensiveness, comprehensibility, conciseness, clinical impact, and overall quality.

Results

Overall, 19/68 (28 %) and 9/68 (13 %) of CRs included final impressions and severity score, respectively. SR writing required significantly (p < 0.001) less time (mean = 308 s; SD ± 60 s) compared to CRs (mean = 458 s; SD ± 72 s). On the other hand, word count was not significantly different (p = 0.059, median = 100 and 106, range = 106–139 and 88–131 for SRs and CRs, respectively). Both clinicians expressed significantly (all p < 0.01) higher scores for SRs compared to CRs in all categories.

Conclusions

Our study supports the use of chest CT SRs in COVID-19 patients to improve referring physician satisfaction, optimizing reporting time and provide a greater amount and quality of information within the report.

Structured Reporting of Computed Tomography in the Staging of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Delphi Consensus Proposal

BACKGROUND

Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist and members of multidisciplinary teams.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A Modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation.

RESULTS

The final SR version was built by including n=16 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n=13 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n=8 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and n=17 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 54 items were included in the final version of the SR. Both in the first and second round, all sections received more than a good rating: a mean value of 4.7 and range of 4.2-5.0 in the first round and a mean value 4.9 and range of 4.9-5 in the second round. In the first round, the Cα correlation coefficient was a poor 0.57: the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.7 (range 1-5) and 728 (mean value 52.00 and standard deviation 2.83), respectively. In the second round, the Cα correlation coefficient was a good 0.82: the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.9 (range 4-5) and 760 (mean value 54.29 and standard deviation 1.64), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The present SR, based on a multi-round consensus-building Delphi exercise following in-depth discussion between expert radiologists in gastro-enteric and oncological imaging, derived from a multidisciplinary agreement between a radiologist, medical oncologist and surgeon in order to obtain the most appropriate communication tool for referring physicians.

RSNA International Trends: A Global Perspective on the COVID-19 Pandemic and Radiology in Late 2020

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has challenged and changed health care systems around the world. There has been a heterogeneity of disease burden, health care resources, and nonimaging testing availability, both geographically and over time. In parallel, there has been a continued increase in understanding how the disease affects patients, effectiveness of therapeutic options, and factors that modulate transmission risk. In this report, radiology experts in representative countries from around the world share insights gained from local experience. These insights provide a guidepost to help address management challenges as cases continue to rise in many parts of the world and suggest modifications in workflow that are likely to continue after this pandemic subsides.

Comparison of Chest CT Grading Systems in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pneumonia

PURPOSE

To compare the performance and interobserver agreement of the COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS), the COVID-19 imaging reporting and data system (COVID-RADS), the RSNA expert consensus statement, and the British Society of Thoracic Imaging (BSTI) guidance statement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this case-control study, total of 100 symptomatic patients suspected of having COVID-19 were included: 50 patients with COVID-19 (59±17 years, 38 men) and 50 patients without COVID-19 (65±24 years, 30 men). Eight radiologists independently scored chest CT images of the cohort according to each reporting system. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) and interobserver agreements were calculated and statistically compared across the systems.

RESULTS

A total of 800 observations were made for each system. The level of suspicion of COVID-19 correlated with the RT-PCR positive rate except for the "negative for pneumonia" classifications in all the systems (Spearman's coefficient: ρ=1.0, P=<.001 for all the systems). Average AUCs were as follows: CO-RADS, 0.84 (95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.85): COVID-RADS, 0.80 (0.78-0.81): the RSNA statement, 0.81 (0.79-0.82): and the BSTI statement, 0.84 (0.812-0.86). Average Cohen's kappa across observers was 0.62 (95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.66), 0.63 (0.58-0.68), 0.63 (0.57-0.69), and 0.61 (0.58-0.64) for CO-RADS, COVID-RADS, the RSNA statement and the BSTI statement, respectively. CO-RADS and the BSTI statement outperformed COVID-RADS and the RSNA statement in diagnostic performance (P=.<.05 for all the comparison).

CONCLUSIONS

CO-RADS, COVID-RADS, the RSNA statement and the BSTI statement provided reasonable performances and interobserver agreements in reporting CT findings of COVID-19.