Faculty Bibliography

Background Chest radiography has not been validated for its prognostic utility in evaluating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Purpose To analyze the prognostic value of a chest radiograph severity scoring system for younger (nonelderly) patients with COVID-19 at initial presentation to the emergency department (ED); outcomes of interest included hospitalization, intubation, prolonged stay, sepsis, and death. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, patients between the ages of 21 and 50 years who presented to the ED of an urban multicenter health system from March 10 to March 26, 2020, with COVID-19 confirmation on real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction were identified. Each patient's ED chest radiograph was divided into six zones and examined for opacities by two cardiothoracic radiologists, and scores were collated into a total concordant lung zone severity score. Clinical and laboratory variables were collected. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between clinical parameters, chest radiograph scores, and patient outcomes. Results The study included 338 patients: 210 men (62%), with median age of 39 years (interquartile range, 31-45 years). After adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, independent predictors of hospital admission (n = 145, 43%) were chest radiograph severity score of 2 or more (odds ratio, 6.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.5, 11; P < .001) and obesity (odds ratio, 2.4 [95% CI: 1.1, 5.4] or morbid obesity). Among patients who were admitted, a chest radiograph score of 3 or more was an independent predictor of intubation (n = 28) (odds ratio, 4.7; 95% CI: 1.8, 13; P = .002) as was hospital site. No significant difference was found in primary outcomes across race and ethnicity or those with a history of tobacco use, asthma, or diabetes mellitus type II. Conclusion For patients aged 21-50 years with coronavirus disease 2019 presenting to the emergency department, a chest radiograph severity score was predictive of risk for hospital admission and intubation. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to identify differences in imaging features between patients with confirmed right middle lobe (RML) torsion compared to those suspected yet without torsion. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:This retrospective study entailing a search of radiology reports from April 1, 2014, to April 15, 2021, resulted in 52 patients with suspected yet without lobar torsion and 4 with confirmed torsion, supplemented by 2 additional cases before the search period for a total of 6 confirmed cases. Four thoracic radiologists (1 an adjudicator) evaluated chest radiographs and computed tomography (CT) examinations, and Fisher exact and Mann-Whitney tests were used to identify any significant differences in imaging features (P<0.05). RESULTS:A reversed halo sign was more frequent for all readers (P=0.001) in confirmed RML torsion than patients without torsion (83.3% vs. 0% for 3 readers, one the adjudicator). The CT coronal bronchial angle between RML bronchus and bronchus intermedius was larger (P=0.035) in torsion (121.28 degrees) than nontorsion cases (98.26 degrees). Patients with torsion had a higher percentage of ground-glass opacity in the affected lobe (P=0.031). A convex fissure towards the adjacent lobe on CT (P=0.009) and increased lobe volume on CT (P=0.001) occurred more often in confirmed torsion. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:A reversed halo sign, larger CT coronal bronchial angle, greater proportion of ground-glass opacity, fissural convexity, and larger lobe volume on CT may aid in early recognition of the rare yet highly significant diagnosis of lobar torsion.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To investigate the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of barotrauma (pneumomediastinum and subcutaneous emphysema) in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. To describe the chest radiography patterns of barotrauma and understand the development in relation to mechanical ventilation and patient mortality. METHODS:We performed a retrospective study of 363 patients with COVID-19 from March 1 to April 8, 2020. Primary outcomes were pneumomediastinum or subcutaneous emphysema with or without pneumothorax, pneumoperitoneum, or pneumoretroperitoneum. The secondary outcomes were length of intubation and death. In patients with pneumomediastinum and/or subcutaneous emphysema, we conducted an imaging review to determine the timeline of barotrauma development. RESULTS:Forty three out of 363 (12%) patients developed barotrauma radiographically. The median time to development of either pneumomediastinum or subcutaneous emphysema was 2 days (IQR 1.0-4.5) after intubation and the median time to pneumothorax was 7 days (IQR 2.0-10.0). The overall incidence of pneumothorax was 28/363 (8%) with an incidence of 17/43 (40%) in the barotrauma cohort and 11/320 (3%) in those without barotrauma (p ≤ 0.001). In total, 257/363 (71%) patients died with an increase in mortality in those with barotrauma 33/43 (77%) vs. 224/320 (70%). When adjusting for covariates, barotrauma was associated with increased odds of death (OR 2.99, 95% CI 1.25-7.17). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Barotrauma is a frequent complication of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. In comparison to intubated COVID-19 patients without barotrauma, there is a higher rate of pneumothorax and an increased risk of death.

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a critical, potentially life-threatening finding on contrast-enhanced cross-sectional chest imaging. Timely and accurate diagnosis of thrombus acuity and extent directly influences patient management, and outcomes. Technical and interpretive pitfalls may present challenges to the radiologist, and by extension, pose nuance in the development and integration of artificial intelligence support tools. This review delineates imaging considerations for diagnosis of acute PE, and rationale, hurdles and applications of artificial intelligence for the PE task.

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged as the source of a global pandemic in late 2019 and early 2020 and quickly spread throughout the world becoming one of the worst pandemics in recent history. This chapter reviews the most up to date radiological literature and outlines the utility of thoracic imaging in COVID-19, defining both the common and the less typical imaging appearances during the acute and subacute phases of COVID-19. The short term complications and the long term sequela will also be discussed in the context of radiology, including pulmonary emboli, acute respiratory distress syndrome, superimposed infections, barotrauma, cardiac manifestations, pulmonary parenchymal scarring and fibrosis.

BACKGROUND:Chest radiography (CXR) often is performed in the acute setting to help understand the extent of respiratory disease in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but a clearly defined role for negative chest radiograph results in assessing patients has not been described. RESEARCH QUESTION/OBJECTIVE:Is portable CXR an effective exclusionary test for future adverse clinical outcomes in patients suspected of having COVID-19? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS/METHODS:Charts of consecutive patients suspected of having COVID-19 at five EDs in New York City between March 19, 2020, and April 23, 2020, were reviewed. Patients were categorized based on absence of findings on initial CXR. The primary outcomes were hospital admission, mechanical ventilation, ARDS, and mortality. RESULTS:Three thousand two hundred forty-five adult patients, 474 (14.6%) with negative initial CXR results, were reviewed. Among all patients, negative initial CXR results were associated with a low probability of future adverse clinical outcomes, with negative likelihood ratios of 0.27 (95% CI, 0.23-0.31) for hospital admission, 0.24 (95% CI, 0.16-0.37) for mechanical ventilation, 0.19 (95% CI, 0.09-0.40) for ARDS, and 0.38 (95% CI, 0.29-0.51) for mortality. Among the subset of 955 patients younger than 65 years and with a duration of symptoms of at least 5 days, no patients with negative CXR results died, and the negative likelihood ratios were 0.17 (95% CI, 0.12-0.25) for hospital admission, 0.09 (95% CI, 0.02-0.36) for mechanical ventilation, and 0.09 (95% CI, 0.01-0.64) for ARDS. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Initial CXR in adult patients suspected of having COVID-19 is a strong exclusionary test for hospital admission, mechanical ventilation, ARDS, and mortality. The value of CXR as an exclusionary test for adverse clinical outcomes is highest among young adults, patients with few comorbidities, and those with a prolonged duration of symptoms.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the influence of coronary artery dominance on observed coronary artery calcification burden in outpatients presenting for coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). METHODS:A 12-month retrospective review was performed of all CCTAs at a single institution. Coronary arterial dominance, Agatston score and presence or absence of cardiovascular risk factors including hypertension (HTN), hyperlipidemia (HLD), diabetes and smoking were recorded. Dominance groups were compared in terms of calcium score adjusted for covariates using analysis of covariance based on ranks. Only covariates observed to be significant independent predictors of the relevant outcome were included in each analysis. All statistical tests were conducted at the two-sided 5% significance level. RESULTS:1223 individuals, 618 women and 605 men were included, mean age 60 years (24-93 years). Right coronary dominance was observed in 91.7% (n = 1109), left dominance in 8% (n = 98), and codominance in 1.3% (n = 16). The distribution of patients among Agatston score severity categories significantly differed between codominant and left (p = 0.008), and codominant and right (p = 0.022) groups, with higher prevalence of either zero or severe CAC in the codominant patients. There was no significant difference in Agatston score between dominance groups. In the subset of individuals with coronary artery calcification, Agatston score was significantly higher in codominant versus left dominant patients (mean Agatston score 595 ± 520 vs. mean 289 ± 607, respectively; p = 0.049), with a trend towards higher scores in comparison to the right-dominant group (p = 0.093). Significance was not maintained upon adjustment for covariates. CONCLUSIONS:While the distribution of Agatston score severity categories differed in codominant versus right- or left-dominant patients, there was no significant difference in Agatston score based on coronary dominance pattern in our cohort. Reporting and inclusion of codominant subsets in larger investigations may elucidate whether codominant anatomy is associated with differing risk.

Purpose/UNASSIGNED:To train a deep learning classification algorithm to predict chest radiograph severity scores and clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Materials and Methods/UNASSIGNED:= 110) populations. Bootstrapping was used to compute CIs. Results/UNASSIGNED:The model trained on the chest radiograph severity score produced the following areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs): 0.80 (95% CI: 0.73, 0.88) for the chest radiograph severity score, 0.76 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.84) for admission, 0.66 (95% CI: 0.56, 0.75) for intubation, and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.49, 0.69) for death. The model trained on clinical variables produced an AUC of 0.64 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.73) for intubation and an AUC of 0.59 (95% CI: 0.50, 0.68) for death. Combining chest radiography and clinical variables increased the AUC of intubation and death to 0.88 (95% CI: 0.79, 0.96) and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.72, 0.91), respectively. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:© RSNA, 2020.

BACKGROUND:Recent studies have demonstrated a complex interplay between comorbid cardiovascular disease, COVID-19 pathophysiology, and poor clinical outcomes. Coronary artery calcification (CAC) may therefore aid in risk stratification of COVID-19 patients. METHODS:Non-contrast chest CT studies on 180 COVID-19 patients ≥ age 21 admitted from March 1, 2020 to April 27, 2020 were retrospectively reviewed by two radiologists to determine CAC scores. Following feature selection, multivariable logistic regression was utilized to evaluate the relationship between CAC scores and patient outcomes. RESULTS:The presence of any identified CAC was associated with intubation (AOR: 3.6, CI: 1.4-9.6) and mortality (AOR: 3.2, CI: 1.4-7.9). Severe CAC was independently associated with intubation (AOR: 4.0, CI: 1.3-13) and mortality (AOR: 5.1, CI: 1.9-15). A greater CAC score (UOR: 1.2, CI: 1.02-1.3) and number of vessels with calcium (UOR: 1.3, CI: 1.02-1.6) was associated with mortality. Visualized coronary stent or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) had no statistically significant association with intubation (AOR: 1.9, CI: 0.4-7.7) or death (AOR: 3.4, CI: 1.0-12). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:COVID-19 patients with any CAC were more likely to require intubation and die than those without CAC. Increasing CAC and number of affected arteries was associated with mortality. Severe CAC was associated with higher intubation risk. Prior CABG or stenting had no association with elevated intubation or death.