Establishment of a Nationwide Korean Imaging Cohort of Coronavirus Disease 2019

Diagnostic performance of radiologists in distinguishing post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from interstitial lung abnormalities

OBJECTIVE

Distinguishing post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from interstitial lung abnormalities (ILA) on CT can be challenging if clinical information is limited. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of radiologists in distinguishing post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from ILA.

METHODS

This multi-reader, multi-case study included 60 age- and sex-matched subjects with chest CT scans. There were 40 cases of ILA (20 fibrotic and 20 non-fibrotic) and 20 cases of post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities. Fifteen radiologists from multiple nations with varying levels of experience independently rated suspicion scores on a 5-point scale to distinguish post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from fibrotic ILA or non-fibrotic ILA. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the weighted κ value, and the scores of individual readers were compared with the consensus of all readers. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance of suspicion scores for distinguishing post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from ILA and for differentiating post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from both fibrotic and non-fibrotic ILA.

RESULTS

Radiologists' diagnostic performance for distinguishing post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from ILA was good (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) range, 0.67-0.92; median AUC, 0.85) with moderate agreement (κ = 0.56). The diagnostic performance for distinguishing post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from non-fibrotic ILA was lower than that from fibrotic ILA (median AUC = 0.89 vs. AUC = 0.80, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Radiologists demonstrated good diagnostic performance and moderate agreement in distinguishing post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from ILA, but careful attention is needed to avoid misdiagnosing them as non-fibrotic ILA.

KEY POINTS

Question How good are radiologists at differentiating interstitial lung abnormalities (ILA) from changes related to COVID-19 infection? Findings Radiologists had a median AUC of 0.85 in distinguishing post-COVID-19 abnormalities from ILA with moderate agreement (κ = 0.56). Clinical relevance Radiologists showed good diagnostic performance and moderate agreement in distinguishing post-COVID-19 residual abnormalities from ILA; nonetheless, caution is needed in distinguishing residual abnormalities from non-fibrotic ILA.

Clinical and Imaging Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Breakthrough Infection in Hospitalized Immunocompromised Patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical and imaging characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection in hospitalized immunocompromised patients in comparison with immunocompetent patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed consecutive adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who received at least one dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine at two academic medical centers between June 2021 and December 2022. Immunocompromised patients (with active solid organ cancer, active hematologic cancer, active immune-mediated inflammatory disease, status post solid organ transplantation, or acquired immune deficiency syndrome) were compared with immunocompetent patients. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of immune status on severe clinical outcomes (in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or intensive care unit admission), severe radiologic pneumonia (≥ 25% of lung involvement), and typical CT pneumonia.

RESULTS

Of 2218 patients (mean age, 69.5 ± 16.1 years), 274 (12.4%), and 1944 (87.6%) were immunocompromised an immunocompetent, respectively. Patients with active solid organ cancer and patients status post solid organ transplantation had significantly higher risks for severe clinical outcomes (adjusted odds ratio = 1.58 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.01-2.47], P = 0.042; and 3.12 [95% CI, 1.47-6.60], P = 0.003, respectively). Patient status post solid organ transplantation and patients with active hematologic cancer were associated with increased risks for severe pneumonia based on chest radiographs (2.96 [95% CI, 1.54-5.67], P = 0.001; and 2.87 [95% CI, 1.50-5.49], P = 0.001, respectively) and for typical CT pneumonia (9.03 [95% CI, 2.49-32.66], P < 0.001; and 4.18 [95% CI, 1.70-10.25], P = 0.002, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Immunocompromised patients with COVID-19 breakthrough infection showed an increased risk of severe clinical outcome, severe pneumonia based on chest radiographs, and typical CT pneumonia. In particular, patients status post solid organ transplantation was specifically found to be associated with a higher risk of all three outcomes than hospitalized immunocompetent patients.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines Over Time Against Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Related to Severe SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Background The impact of waning vaccine effectiveness on the severity of COVID-19-related findings discovered with radiologic examinations remains underexplored. Purpose To evaluate the effectiveness of vaccines over time against severe clinical and radiologic outcomes related to SARS-CoV-2 infections. Materials and Methods This multicenter retrospective study included patients in the Korean Imaging Cohort of COVID-19 database who were hospitalized for COVID-19 between June 2021 and December 2022. Patients who had received at least one dose of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine were categorized based on the time elapsed between diagnosis and their last vaccination. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against a composite of severe clinical outcomes (invasive ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or in-hospital death) and severe radiologic pneumonia (≥25% of lung involvement), and odds ratios (ORs) were compared between patients vaccinated within 90 days of diagnosis and those vaccinated more than 90 days before diagnosis. Results Of 4196 patients with COVID-19 (mean age, 66 years ± 17 [SD]; 2132 [51%] women, 2064 [49%] men), the ratio of severe pneumonia since their most recent vaccination was as follows: 90 days or less, 18% (277 of 1527); between 91 and 120 days, 22% (172 of 783); between 121 and 180 days, 27% (274 of 1032); between 181 and 240 days, 32% (159 of 496); and more than 240 days, 31% (110 of 358). Patients vaccinated more than 240 days before diagnosis showed increased odds of severe clinical outcomes compared with patients vaccinated within 90 days (OR = 1.94 [95% CI: 1.16, 3.24]; P = .01). Similarly, patients vaccinated more than 240 days before diagnosis showed increased odds of severe pneumonia on chest radiographs compared with patients vaccinated within 90 days (OR = 1.65 [95% CI: 1.13, 2.40]; P = .009). No difference in odds of severe clinical outcomes (P = .13 to P = .68) or severe pneumonia (P = .15 to P = .86) were observed between patients vaccinated 91-240 days before diagnosis and those vaccinated within 90 days of diagnosis. Conclusion Vaccine effectiveness against severe clinical outcomes and severe pneumonia related to SARS-CoV-2 infection gradually declined, with increased odds of both observed in patients vaccinated more than 240 days before diagnosis. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Wells in this issue.

Assessment of the Suitability of the Fleischner Society Imaging Guidelines in Evaluating Chest Radiographs of COVID-19 Patients

BACKGROUND

The Fleischner Society established consensus guidelines for imaging in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We investigated the prevalence of pneumonia and the adverse outcomes by dividing groups according to the symptoms and risk factors of patients and assessed the suitability of the Fleischner society imaging guidelines in evaluating chest radiographs of COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

From February 2020 to May 2020, 685 patients (204 males, mean 58 ± 17.9 years) who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and hospitalized were included. We divided patients into four groups according to the severity of symptoms and presence of risk factors (age > 65 years and presence of comorbidities). The patient groups were defined as follows: group 1 (asymptomatic patients), group 2 (patients with mild symptoms without risk factors), group 3 (patients with mild symptoms and risk factors), and group 4 (patients with moderate to severe symptoms). According to the Fleischner society, chest imaging is not indicated for groups 1-2 but is indicated for groups 3-4. We compared the prevalence and score of pneumonia on chest radiographs and compare the adverse outcomes (progress to severe pneumonia, intensive care unit admission, and death) between groups.

RESULTS

Among the 685 COVID-19 patients, 138 (20.1%), 396 (57.8%), 102 (14.9%), and 49 (7.1%) patients corresponded to groups 1 to 4, respectively. Patients in groups 3-4 were significantly older and showed significantly higher prevalence rates of pneumonia (group 1-4: 37.7%, 51.3%, 71.6%, and 98%, respectively, P < 0.001) than those in groups 1-2. Adverse outcomes were also higher in groups 3-4 than in groups 1-2 (group 1-4: 8.0%, 3.5%, 6.9%, and 51%, respectively, P < 0.001). Patients with adverse outcomes in group 1 were initially asymptomatic but symptoms developed during follow-up. They were older (mean age, 80 years) and most of them had comorbidities (81.8%). Consistently asymptomatic patients had no adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of pneumonia and adverse outcomes were different according to the symptoms and risk factors in COVID-19 patients. Therefore, as the Fleischner Society recommended, evaluation and monitoring of COVID-19 pneumonia using chest radiographs is necessary for old symptomatic patients with comorbidities.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Imaging Features in Hospitalized Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Subvariants

Background Differences in the clinical and radiological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants have not been well studied. Purpose To compare clinical disease severity and radiologically severe pneumonia in patients with COVID-19 hospitalized during a period of either Omicron BA.1/BA.2 or Omicron BA.5 subvariant predominance. Materials and Methods This multicenter retrospective study, included patients registered in the Korean Imaging Cohort of COVID-19 database who were hospitalized for COVID-19 between January and December 2022. Publicly available relative variant genome frequency data were used to determine the dominant periods of Omicron BA.1/BA.2 subvariants (January 17 to June 20, 2022) and the Omicron BA.5 subvariant (July 4 to December 5, 2022). Clinical outcomes and imaging pneumonia outcomes based on chest radiography and CT were compared among predominant subvariants using multivariable analyses adjusted for covariates. Results Of 1916 confirmed patients with COVID-19 (mean age, 72 years ± 16 [SD]; 1019 males), 1269 were registered during the Omicron BA.1/BA.2 subvariant dominant period and 647 during the Omicron BA.5 subvariant dominant period. Patients in the BA.5 group showed lower odds of high-flow O₂ requirement (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.75 [95% CI: 0.57, 0.99]; P = .04), mechanical ventilation (adjusted OR, 0.49 [95% CI: 0.34, 0.72]; P < .001]), and death (adjusted OR, 0.47 [95% CI: 0.33, 0.68]; P <.001) than those in the BA.1/BA.2 group. Additionally, the BA.5 group had lower odds of severe pneumonia on chest radiographs (adjusted OR, 0.68 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.88]; P = .004) and higher odds of atypical pattern pneumonia on CT images (adjusted OR, 1.81 [95% CI: 1.26, 2.58]; P = .001) than the BA.1/BA.2 group. Conclusions Patients hospitalized during the period of Omicron BA.5 subvariant predominance had lower odds of clinical and pneumonia severity than those hospitalized during the period of Omicron BA.1/BA.2 predominance, even after adjusting for covariates. See also the editorial by Hammer in this issue.

Generative adversarial network for automatic quantification of Coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia on chest radiographs

PURPOSE

To develop a generative adversarial network (GAN) to quantify COVID-19 pneumonia on chest radiographs automatically.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 50,000 consecutive non-COVID-19 chest CT scans in 2015-2017 for training. Anteroposterior virtual chest, lung, and pneumonia radiographs were generated from whole, segmented lung, and pneumonia pixels from each CT scan. Two GANs were sequentially trained to generate lung images from radiographs and to generate pneumonia images from lung images. GAN-driven pneumonia extent (pneumonia area/lung area) was expressed from 0% to 100%. We examined the correlation of GAN-driven pneumonia extent with semi-quantitative Brixia X-ray severity score (one dataset, n = 4707) and quantitative CT-driven pneumonia extent (four datasets, n = 54-375), along with analyzing a measurement difference between the GAN and CT extents. Three datasets (n = 243-1481), where unfavorable outcomes (respiratory failure, intensive care unit admission, and death) occurred in 10%, 38%, and 78%, respectively, were used to examine the predictive power of GAN-driven pneumonia extent.

RESULTS

GAN-driven radiographic pneumonia was correlated with the severity score (0.611) and CT-driven extent (0.640). 95% limits of agreements between GAN and CT-driven extents were -27.1% to 17.4%. GAN-driven pneumonia extent provided odds ratios of 1.05-1.18 per percent for unfavorable outcomes in the three datasets, with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) of 0.614-0.842. When combined with demographic information only and with both demographic and laboratory information, the prediction models yielded AUCs of 0.643-0.841 and 0.688-0.877, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The generative adversarial network automatically quantified COVID-19 pneumonia on chest radiographs and identified patients with unfavorable outcomes.

SARS-CoV-2 Variants Infection in Relationship to Imaging-based Pneumonia and Clinical Outcomes

Background Few reports have evaluated the effect of the SARS-CoV-2 variant and vaccination on the clinical and imaging features of COVID-19. Purpose To evaluate and compare the effect of vaccination and variant prevalence on the clinical and imaging features of infections by the SARS-CoV-2. Materials and Methods Consecutive adults hospitalized for confirmed COVID-19 at three centers (two academic medical centers and one community hospital) and registered in a nationwide open data repository for COVID-19 between August 2021 and March 2022 were retrospectively included. All patients had available chest radiographs or CT images. Patients were divided into two groups according to predominant variant type over the study period. Differences between clinical and imaging features were analyzed with use of the Pearson χ2 test, Fisher exact test, or the independent t test. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the effect of variant predominance and vaccination status on imaging features of pneumonia and clinical severity. Results Of the 2180 patients (mean age, 57 years ± 21; 1171 women), 1022 patients (47%) were treated during the Delta variant predominant period and 1158 (53%) during the Omicron period. The Omicron variant prevalence was associated with lower pneumonia severity based on CT scores (odds ratio [OR], 0.71 [95% CI: 0.51, 0.99; P = .04]) and lower clinical severity based on intensive care unit (ICU) admission or in-hospital death (OR, 0.43 [95% CI: 0.24, 0.77; P = .004]) than the Delta variant prevalence. Vaccination was associated with the lowest odds of severe pneumonia based on CT scores (OR, 0.05 [95% CI: 0.03, 0.13; P < .001]) and clinical severity based on ICU admission or in-hospital death (OR, 0.15 [95% CI: 0.07, 0.31; P < .001]) relative to no vaccination. Conclusion The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant prevalence and vaccination were associated with better clinical outcomes and lower severe pneumonia risk relative to Delta variant prevalence. © RSNA, 2022 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Little in this issue.

Deep Learning With Chest Radiographs for Making Prognoses in Patients With COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

An artificial intelligence (AI) model using chest radiography (CXR) may provide good performance in making prognoses for COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop and validate a prediction model using CXR based on an AI model and clinical variables to predict clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

This retrospective longitudinal study included patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at multiple COVID-19 medical centers between February 2020 and October 2020. Patients at Boramae Medical Center were randomly classified into training, validation, and internal testing sets (at a ratio of 8:1:1, respectively). An AI model using initial CXR images as input, a logistic regression model using clinical information, and a combined model using the output of the AI model (as CXR score) and clinical information were developed and trained to predict hospital length of stay (LOS) ≤2 weeks, need for oxygen supplementation, and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The models were externally validated in the Korean Imaging Cohort of COVID-19 data set for discrimination and calibration.

RESULTS

The AI model using CXR and the logistic regression model using clinical variables were suboptimal to predict hospital LOS ≤2 weeks or the need for oxygen supplementation but performed acceptably in the prediction of ARDS (AI model area under the curve [AUC] 0.782, 95% CI 0.720-0.845; logistic regression model AUC 0.878, 95% CI 0.838-0.919). The combined model performed better in predicting the need for oxygen supplementation (AUC 0.704, 95% CI 0.646-0.762) and ARDS (AUC 0.890, 95% CI 0.853-0.928) compared to the CXR score alone. Both the AI and combined models showed good calibration for predicting ARDS (P=.079 and P=.859).

CONCLUSIONS

The combined prediction model, comprising the CXR score and clinical information, was externally validated as having acceptable performance in predicting severe illness and excellent performance in predicting ARDS in patients with COVID-19.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Biomedical Publications and Their Citation Frequency

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in enormous related publications. However, the citation frequency of these documents and their influence on the journal impact factor (JIF) are not well examined. We aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on biomedical research publications and their citation frequency.

METHODS

We searched publications on biomedical research in the Web of Science using the search terms "COVID-19," "SARS-Cov-2," "2019 corona*," "corona virus disease 2019," "coronavirus disease 2019," "novel coronavirus infection" and "2019-ncov." The top 200 journals were defined as those with a higher number of COVID-19 publications than other journals in 2020. The COVID-19 impact ratio was calculated as the ratio of the average number of citations per item in 2021 to the JIF for 2020.

RESULTS

The average number of citations for the top 200 journals in 2021, per item published in 2020, was 25.7 (range, 0-270). The average COVID-19 impact ratio was 3.84 (range, 0.26-16.58) for 197 journals that recorded the JIF for 2020. The average JIF ratio for the top 197 journals including the JIFs for 2020 and 2021 was 1.77 (range, 0.68-8.89). The COVID-19 impact ratio significantly correlated with the JIF ratio (r = 0.403, P = 0.010). Twenty-five Korean journals with a COVID-19 impact ratio > 1.5 demonstrated a higher JIF ratio (1.31 ± 0.39 vs. 1.01 ± 0.18, P < 0.001) than 33 Korean journals with a lower COVID-19 impact ratio.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 pandemic infection has significantly impacted the trends in biomedical research and the citation of related publications.

Development and Validation of a Multimodal-Based Prognosis and Intervention Prediction Model for COVID-19 Patients in a Multicenter Cohort

The ability to accurately predict the prognosis and intervention requirements for treating highly infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, can greatly support the effective management of patients, especially in resource-limited settings. The aim of the study is to develop and validate a multimodal artificial intelligence (AI) system using clinical findings, laboratory data and AI-interpreted features of chest X-rays (CXRs), and to predict the prognosis and the required interventions for patients diagnosed with COVID-19, using multi-center data. In total, 2282 real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 patients’ initial clinical findings, laboratory data and CXRs were retrospectively collected from 13 medical centers in South Korea, between January 2020 and June 2021. The prognostic outcomes collected included intensive care unit (ICU) admission and in-hospital mortality. Intervention outcomes included the use of oxygen (O2) supplementation, mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). A deep learning algorithm detecting 10 common CXR abnormalities (DLAD-10) was used to infer the initial CXR taken. A random forest model with a quantile classifier was used to predict the prognostic and intervention outcomes, using multimodal data. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) values for the single-modal model, using clinical findings, laboratory data and the outputs from DLAD-10, were 0.742 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.696−0.788), 0.794 (0.745−0.843) and 0.770 (0.724−0.815), respectively. The AUROC of the combined model, using clinical findings, laboratory data and DLAD-10 outputs, was significantly higher at 0.854 (0.820−0.889) than that of all other models (p < 0.001, using DeLong’s test). In the order of importance, age, dyspnea, consolidation and fever were significant clinical variables for prediction. The most predictive DLAD-10 output was consolidation. We have shown that a multimodal AI model can improve the performance of predicting both the prognosis and intervention in COVID-19 patients, and this could assist in effective treatment and subsequent resource management. Further, image feature extraction using an established AI engine with well-defined clinical outputs, and combining them with different modes of clinical data, could be a useful way of creating an understandable multimodal prediction model.

Impact of Mediastinal Lymphadenopathy on the Severity of COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Nationwide Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

We analyzed the differences between clinical characteristics and computed tomography (CT) findings in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to establish potential relationships with mediastinal lymphadenopathy and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We compared the clinical characteristics and CT findings of COVID-19 patients from a nationwide multicenter cohort who were grouped based on the presence or absence of mediastinal lymphadenopathy. Differences between clinical characteristics and CT findings in these groups were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the impact of mediastinal lymphadenopathy on clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 344 patients included in this study, 53 (15.4%) presented with mediastinal lymphadenopathy. The rate of diffuse alveolar damage pattern pneumonia and the visual CT scores were significantly higher in patients with mediastinal lymphadenopathy than in those without (P < 0.05). A positive correlation between the number of enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes and visual CT scores was noted in patients with mediastinal lymphadenopathy (Spearman's ρ = 0.334, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that mediastinal lymphadenopathy was independently associated with a higher risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (odds ratio, 95% confidence interval; 3.25, 1.06-9.95) but was not significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death in patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 patients with mediastinal lymphadenopathy had a larger extent of pneumonia than those without. Multivariate analysis adjusted for clinical characteristics and CT findings revealed that the presence of mediastinal lymphadenopathy was significantly associated with ICU admission.

Imaging and Clinical Features of COVID-19 Breakthrough Infections: A Multicenter Study

Background Since vaccines against COVID-19 became available, rare breakthrough infections have been reported despite their high efficacies. Purpose To evaluate the clinical and imaging characteristics of patients with COVID-19 breakthrough infections and compare them with those of unvaccinated patients with COVID-19. Materials and Methods In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, the authors analyzed patient (aged ≥18 years) data from three centers that were registered in an open data repository for COVID-19 between June and August 2021. Hospitalized patients with baseline chest radiographs were divided into three groups according to their vaccination status. Differences between clinical and imaging features were analyzed using the Pearson χ2 test, Fisher exact test, and analysis of variance. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate associations between clinical factors, including vaccination status and clinical outcomes. Results Of the 761 hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the mean age was 47 years and 385 (51%) were women; 47 patients (6%) were fully vaccinated (breakthrough infection), 127 (17%) were partially vaccinated, and 587 (77%) were unvaccinated. Of the 761 patients, 412 (54%) underwent chest CT during hospitalization. Among the patients who underwent CT, the proportions without pneumonia were 22% of unvaccinated patients (71 of 326), 30% of partially vaccinated patients (19 of 64), and 59% of fully vaccinated patients (13 of 22) (P < .001). Fully vaccinated status was associated with a lower risk of requiring supplemental oxygen (odds ratio [OR], 0.24 [95% CI: 0.09, 0.64; P = .005]) and lower risk of intensive care unit admission (OR, 0.08 [95% CI: 0.09, 0.78; P = .02]) compared with unvaccinated status. Conclusion Patients with COVID-19 breakthrough infections had a significantly higher proportion of CT scans without pneumonia compared with unvaccinated patients. Vaccinated patients with breakthrough infections had a lower likelihood of requiring supplemental oxygen and intensive care unit admission. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Schiebler and Bluemke in this issue.

Stratifying the early radiologic trajectory in dyspneic patients with COVID-19 pneumonia

Objective

This study aimed to stratify the early pneumonia trajectory on chest radiographs and compare patient characteristics in dyspneic patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Materials and methods

We retrospectively included 139 COVID-19 patients with dyspnea (87 men, 62.7±16.3 years) and serial chest radiographs from January to September 2020. Radiographic pneumonia extent was quantified as a percentage using a previously-developed deep learning algorithm. A group-based trajectory model was used to categorize the pneumonia trajectory after symptom onset during hospitalization. Clinical findings, and outcomes were compared, and Cox regression was performed for survival analysis.

Results

Radiographic pneumonia trajectories were categorized into four groups. Group 1 (n = 83, 59.7%) had negligible pneumonia, and group 2 (n = 29, 20.9%) had mild pneumonia. Group 3 (n = 13, 9.4%) and group 4 (n = 14, 10.1%) showed similar considerable pneumonia extents at baseline, but group 3 had decreasing pneumonia extent at 1–2 weeks, while group 4 had increasing pneumonia extent. Intensive care unit admission and mortality were significantly more frequent in groups 3 and 4 than in groups 1 and 2 (P < .05). Groups 3 and 4 shared similar clinical and laboratory findings, but thrombocytopenia (<150×10³/μL) was exclusively observed in group 4 (P = .016). When compared to groups 1 and 2, group 4 (hazard ratio, 63.3; 95% confidence interval, 7.9–504.9) had a two-fold higher risk for mortality than group 3 (hazard ratio, 31.2; 95% confidence interval, 3.5–280.2), and this elevated risk was maintained after adjusting confounders.

Conclusion

Monitoring the early radiologic trajectory beyond baseline further prognosticated at-risk COVID-19 patients, who potentially had thrombo-inflammatory responses.

Prognostic Implications of CT Feature Analysis in Patients with COVID-19: a Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have classified chest computed tomography (CT) findings of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and analyzed their correlations with prognosis. The present study aimed to evaluate retrospectively the clinical and chest CT findings of COVID-19 and to analyze CT findings and determine their relationships with clinical severity.

METHODS

Chest CT and clinical features of 271 COVID-19 patients were assessed. The presence of CT findings and distribution of parenchymal abnormalities were evaluated, and CT patterns were classified as bronchopneumonia, organizing pneumonia (OP), or diffuse alveolar damage (DAD). Total extents were assessed using a visual scoring system and artificial intelligence software. Patients were allocated to two groups based on clinical outcomes, that is, to a severe group (requiring O₂ therapy or mechanical ventilation, n = 55) or a mild group (not requiring O₂ therapy or mechanical ventilation, n = 216). Clinical and CT features of these two groups were compared and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Age, lymphocyte count, levels of C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin were significantly different in the two groups. Forty-five of the 271 patients had normal chest CT findings. The most common CT findings among the remaining 226 patients were ground-glass opacity (98%), followed by consolidation (53%). CT findings were classified as OP (93%), DAD (4%), or bronchopneumonia (3%) and all nine patients with DAD pattern were included in the severe group. Uivariate and multivariate analyses showed an elevated procalcitonin (odds ratio [OR], 2.521; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.001-6.303, P = 0.048), and higher visual CT scores (OR, 1.137; 95% CI, 1.042-1.236; P = 0.003) or higher total extent by AI measurement (OR, 1.048; 95% CI, 1.020-1.076; P < 0.001) were significantly associated with a severe clinical course.

CONCLUSION

CT findings of COVID-19 pneumonia can be classified into OP, DAD, or bronchopneumonia patterns and all patients with DAD pattern were included in severe group. Elevated inflammatory markers and higher CT scores were found to be significant predictors of poor prognosis in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.