Automated quantitative thin slice volumetric low dose CT analysis predicts disease severity in COVID-19 patients

PurposeThis study aimed to identify predictive (bio-)markers for COVID-19 severity derived from automated quantitative thin slice low dose volumetric CT analysis, clinical chemistry and lung function testing.MethodsSeventy-four COVID-19 patients admitted between March 16th and June 3rd 2020 to the Asklepios Lung Clinic Munich-Gauting, Germany, were included in the study. Patients were categorized in a non-severe group including patients hospitalized on general wards only and in a severe group including patients requiring intensive care treatment. Fully automated quantification of CT scans was performed via IMBIO CT Lung Texture analysis™ software. Predictive biomarkers were assessed with receiver-operator-curve and likelihood analysis.ResultsFifty-five patients (44% female) presented with non-severe COVID-19 and 19 patients (32% female) with severe disease. Five fatalities were reported in the severe group. Accurate automated CT analysis was possible with 61 CTs (82%). Disease severity was linked to lower residual normal lung (72.5% vs 87%, p = 0.003), increased ground glass opacities (GGO) (8% vs 5%, p = 0.031) and increased reticular pattern (8% vs 2%, p = 0.025). Disease severity was associated with advanced age (76 vs 59 years, p = 0.001) and elevated serum C-reactive protein (CRP, 92.2 vs 36.3 mg/L, p < 0.001), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH, 485 vs 268 IU/L, p < 0.001) and oxygen supplementation (p < 0.001) upon admission. Predictive risk factors for the development of severe COVID-19 were oxygen supplementation, LDH >313 IU/L, CRP >71 mg/L, <70% normal lung texture, >12.5% GGO and >4.5% reticular pattern.ConclusionAutomated low dose CT analysis upon admission might be a useful tool to predict COVID-19 severity in patients.     

Mode of detection matters: Differences in screen-detected versus symptomatic breast cancers

ObjectiveAlthough extensive analyses evaluating screening mammography for breast cancer have been published, some utilized databases do not distinguish between modes of detection, which confounds the conclusions made about the impact of screening mammography.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of women at our institution with pathologically-proven breast cancer from January 2015 to April 2018 was conducted. Subjects were categorized by their mode of diagnosis: screening or non-screening. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and treatments were compared between detection methods using Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuous variables and chi-squared or Fisher's exact test.Results1026 breast cancers were analyzed. 80.8% of screen-detected breast cancers were invasive. Compared to symptomatically detected cancers, screen-detected were smaller (median size 8 mm vs. 15 mm, p < 0.001), less invasive (80.8% vs. 94.3), had a lower pathologic grade (29% grade 3 vs. 45.7%, p < 0.001), a lower clinical stage, and less aggressive histology (51.9% low Ki67 vs. 30.5%, and 88.2% HER2 negative vs. 76.6%, p < 0.001). Screen-detected cancers were less likely to have extramammary disease (13.2% positive lymph nodes vs. 34.0% and 0.4% distant metastases vs. 6.9%, p < 0.001). Women with screen-detected cancers were more likely to undergo conservative treatment (74.8% underwent lumpectomy vs. 59.9%, and 80.0% received no chemotherapy vs. 51.3%, p < 0.001).ConclusionIn this study, while the vast majority of screen-detected cancers were invasive, they were more likely to be smaller, less aggressive, and a lower pathologic grade and clinical stage. Furthermore, women with screen-detected cancers were less likely to have extramammary disease and more likely to undergo conservative treatment.     

Electronic Worklist Improves Timeliness of Screening Mammogram Interpretation in an Urban Underserved Population

ObjectivesTo evaluate the impact of an electronic workflow update on screening mammography turnaround time and time to diagnostic imaging for mammography performed on our urban mobile mammography van and at an urban community health center.MethodPrior to 10/15/2019, screening exams for the mammography van and urban community health center were made available for interpretation to a single designated radiologist via a manually generated paper list. On 10/15/2019, screening exams were routed electronically onto PACS for any breast radiologist across our Network to interpret. Screening mammogram turnaround time (defined as time form image acquisition to report finalization), time to diagnostic imaging, and time to tissue sampling were collected for pre- and post-implementation periods (6/1-9/30/2019 and 11/1/2019-2/29/2020, respectively) and compared via student t-test and statistical process control analyses.ResultsThe number of screening exams in the pre- and post-implementation periods were 851 and 728 exams, respectively. Patients were predominately Black and/or African American (400/1579, 25%), non-English speaking (858/1579, 54%) and insured by Medicaid (751/1579, 48%). After implementation of the electronic workflow, turnaround time decreased from 101.0 to 36.4 hours (63.9%, P <0.001) and statistical process control analyses showed sustained decrease in mean turnaround time. However, mean time to diagnostic imaging and tissue sampling were unchanged after implementation (39 vs 45, days; P = 0.330 and 43 vs 59; P = 0.187, respectively).ConclusionElectronic workflow management can reduce screening mammography turnaround time for underserved populations, but additional efforts are warranted to improve time to imaging follow-up for abnormal screening mammograms.     

Quantitative assessment of lung involvement on chest CT at admission: Impact on hypoxia and outcome in COVID-19 patients

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to quantify COVID-19 pneumonia features using CT performed at time of admission to emergency department in order to predict patients' hypoxia during the hospitalization and outcome.MethodsConsecutive chest CT performed in the emergency department between March 1st and April 7th 2020 for COVID-19 pneumonia were analyzed. The three features of pneumonia (GGO, semi-consolidation and consolidation) and the percentage of well-aerated lung were quantified using a HU threshold based software. ROC curves identified the optimal cut-off values of CT parameters to predict hypoxia worsening and hospital discharge. Multiple Cox proportional hazards regression was used to analyze the capability of CT quantitative features, demographic and clinical variables to predict the time to hospital discharge.ResultsSeventy-seven patients (median age 56-years-old, 51 men) with COVID-19 pneumonia at CT were enrolled. The quantitative features of COVID-19 pneumonia were not associated to age, sex and time-from-symptoms onset, whereas higher number of comorbidities was correlated to lower well-aerated parenchyma ratio (rho = −0.234, p = 0.04) and increased semi-consolidation ratio (rho = −0.303, p = 0.008).Well-aerated lung (≤57%), semi-consolidation (≥17%) and consolidation (≥9%) predicted worst hypoxemia during hospitalization, with moderate areas under curves (AUC 0.76, 0.75, 0.77, respectively). Multiple Cox regression identified younger age (p < 0.01), female sex (p < 0.001), longer time-from-symptoms onset (p = 0.049), semi-consolidation ≤17% (p < 0.01) and consolidation ≤13% (p = 0.03) as independent predictors of shorter time to hospital discharge.ConclusionQuantification of pneumonia features on admitting chest CT predicted hypoxia worsening during hospitalization and time to hospital discharge in COVID-19 patients.     

Recovery of outpatient imaging utilization during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic

ObjectiveDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, Radiology practices experienced marked reductions in outpatient imaging volumes. Our purpose was to evaluate the timing, rate, and degree of recovery of outpatient imaging during the first wave of the pandemic. We also sought to ascertain the relationship of outpatient imaging recovery to the incidence of COVID-19 cases.MethodsRetrospective study of outpatient imaging volumes in a large healthcare system was performed from January 1, 2019-August 25, 2020. Dataset was split to compare Pre-COVID (weeks 1–9), Peak-COVID (weeks 10–15) and Recovery-COVID (weeks 16–34) periods. Chi-square and Independent-samples t-tests compared weekly outpatient imaging volumes in 2020 and 2019. Regression analyses assessed the rate of decline and recovery in Peak-COVID and Recovery-COVID periods, respectively.ResultsTotal outpatient imaging volume in 2020 (weeks 1–34) was 327,738 exams, compared to 440,314 in 2019. The 2020 mean weekly imaging volumes were significantly decreased in Peak-COVID (p = 0.0148) and Recovery-COVID (p = 0.0003) periods. Mean weekly decline rate was −2580 exams/week and recovery rate was +617 exams/week. The 2020 Post-COVID (weeks 10–34) period had an average decrease of 36.5% (4813.4/13,178.6) imaging exams/week and total estimated decrease of 120,335 exams. Significant inverse correlation (−0.8338, p < 0.0001) was seen between positive-tested COVID-19 cases and imaging utilization with 1-week lag during Post-COVID (weeks 10–34) period.ConclusionRecovery of outpatient imaging volume during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic showed a gradual return to pre-pandemic levels over the course of 3–4 months. The rate of imaging utilization was inversely associated with new positive-tested COVID-19 cases with a 1-week lag.     

Mediastinal lymphadenopathy may predict 30-day mortality in patients with COVID-19

PurposeThere is scarce data on the impact of the presence of mediastinal lymphadenopathy on the prognosis of coronavirus-disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to investigate whether its presence is associated with increased risk for 30-day mortality in a large group of patients with COVID-19.MethodIn this retrospective cross-sectional study, 650 adult laboratory-confirmed hospitalized COVID-19 patients were included. Patients with comorbidities that may cause enlarged mediastinal lymphadenopathy were excluded. Demographics, clinical characteristics, vital and laboratory findings, and outcome were obtained from electronic medical records. Computed tomography scans were evaluated by two blinded radiologists. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine independent predictive factors of 30-day mortality.ResultsPatients with enlarged mediastinal lymphadenopathy (n = 60, 9.2%) were older and more likely to have at least one comorbidity than patients without enlarged mediastinal lymphadenopathy (p = 0.03, p = 0.003). There were more deaths in patients with enlarged mediastinal lymphadenopathy than in those without (11/60 vs 45/590, p = 0.01). Older age (OR:3.74, 95% CI: 2.06–6.79; p < 0.001), presence of consolidation pattern (OR:1.93, 95% CI: 1.09–3.40; p = 0.02) and enlarged mediastinal lymphadenopathy (OR:2.38, 95% CI:1.13–4.98; p = 0.02) were independently associated with 30-day mortality.ConclusionIn this large group of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we found that in addition to older age and consolidation pattern on CT scan, enlarged mediastinal lymphadenopathy were independently associated with increased mortality. Mediastinal evaluation should be performed in all patients with COVID-19.     

Increased per-patient imaging utilization in an emergency department setting during COVID-19

IntroductionCOVID-19 has resulted in decreases in absolute imaging volumes, however imaging utilization on a per-patient basis has not been reported. Here we compare per-patient imaging utilization, characterized by imaging studies and work relative value units (wRVUs), in an emergency department (ED) during a COVID-19 surge to the same period in 2019.MethodsThis retrospective study included patients presenting to the ED from April 1–May 1, 2020 and 2019. Patients were stratified into three primary subgroups: all patients (n = 9580, n = 5686), patients presenting with respiratory complaints (n = 1373, n = 2193), and patients presenting without respiratory complaints (n = 8207, n = 3493). The primary outcome was imaging studies/patient and wRVU/patient. Secondary analysis was by disposition and COVID status. Comparisons were via the Wilcoxon rank-sum or Chi-squared tests.ResultsThe total patients, imaging exams, and wRVUs during the 2020 and 2019 periods were 5686 and 9580 (−41%), 6624 and 8765 (−24%), and 4988 and 7818 (−36%), respectively, and the percentage patients receiving any imaging was 67% and 51%, respectively (p < .0001). In 2020 there was a 170% relative increase in patients presenting with respiratory complaints. In 2020, patients without respiratory complaints generated 24% more wRVU/patient (p < .0001) and 33% more studies/patient (p < .0001), highlighted by 38% more CTs/patient.ConclusionWe report increased per-patient imaging utilization in an emergency department during COVID-19, particularly in patients without respiratory complaints.     

Addressing ethnic disparities in imaging utilization and clinical outcomes for COVID-19

PurposeRacial and ethnic disparities have exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic as the healthcare system is overwhelmed. While Hispanics are disproportionately affected by COVID-19, little is known about ethnic disparities in the hospital settings. This study investigates imaging utilization and clinical outcomes between Hispanic and non-Hispanic COVID-19 patients in the Emergency Department (ED) and during hospitalization.MethodsThrough retrospective chart review, we included 331 symptomatic COVID-19 patients (mean age 53.2 years) at a metropolitan healthcare system from March to June 2020. Poisson regression was used to compare diagnostic imaging utilization and clinical outcomes between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients.ResultsAfter adjusting for confounders, no statistically significant difference was found between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients for the number of weekly chest X-rays. Results were categorized into four clinical outcomes: ED management (0.16 ± 0.05 vs. 0.14 ± 0.8, p:0.79); requiring inpatient management (1.31 ± 0.11 vs. 1.46 ± 0.16, p:0.43); ICU admission without invasive ventilation (1.4 ± 0.17 vs. 1.35 ± 0.26, p:0.86); and ICU admission and ventilator support (3.29 ± 0.22 vs. 3.59 ± 0.37, p:0.38). There were no statistically significant relative differences in adjusted prevalence rate between ethnic groups for all clinical outcomes (p > 0.05). There was a statistically significant longer adjusted length of stay (days) in non-Hispanics for two subcohorts: inpatient management (8.16 ± 0.31 vs. 9.72 ± 0.5, p < 0.01) and ICU admission without invasive ventilation (10.39 ± 0.57 vs. 13.45 ± 1.13, p < 0.01).ConclusionsFor Hispanic and non-Hispanic COVID-19 patients in the ED or hospitalized, there were no statistically significant differences in imaging utilization and clinical outcomes.     

Role of complementary Ct chest in patients presenting with acute abdominal symptoms during covid-19 pandemic: a UK experience

BackgroundIn March 2020, the UK Intercollegiate General Surgery Guidance on COVID-19 recommended that patients undergoing emergency abdominal CT should have a complementary CT chest for COVID-19 screening.PurposeTo establish if complementary CT chest was performed as recommended, and if CT chest influenced surgical intervention decision. To assess detection rate of COVID-19 on CT and its correlation with RT-PCR swab results. To determine if COVID-19 changes is reliably detected within the lung bases which are usually imaged in standard abdominal CT.MethodsPatients with acute abdominal symptoms presenting to a single institution between 1st and 30th April 2020 who had abdominal CT and complementary CT chest were retrospectively extracted from Computerised Radiology Information System. CT COVID-19 changes were categorised according to British Society of Thoracic Radiology reporting guidance. Patient demographics (age and gender), RT-PCR swab results and management pathway (conservative or intervention) were recorded from electronic patient records. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate any significant association between variables. p values ≤0.05 were regarded as statistically significant.ResultsCompliancy rate in performing complementary CT chest was 92.5% (148/160). Thirty-five patients (35/148,23.6%) underwent intervention during admission. There was no significant association (p = 0.9085) between acquisition of CT chest and management pathway (conservative vs intervention). CT chest had 57% sensitivity (CI 18.41% to 90.1%) and 100% specificity (CI 92% to 100%) in COVID-19 diagnosis. Three of ten patients who had classic COVID-19 changes on CT chest did not have corresponding changes in lung bases.ConclusionCompliance with performing complementary CT chest in acute abdomen patients for COVID-19 screening was high and it did not influence subsequent surgical or interventional management.     

Interventional radiology procedural volume changes during COVID-19 initial phase: A tertiary level Midwest health system experience

BackgroundTo evaluate Interventional Radiology (IR) procedural volume changes at a large Midwest health system between March 17, 2020 and April 30, 2020 following a state-mandated shutdown of nonessential procedures during the initial phase of COVID-19.MethodsIR procedural volumes were compiled, stratified by location and compared with Diagnostic Radiology (DR) volumes during the same timeframe. Procedure volume was categorized by type, including oncology, dialysis interventions, and drainage procedures with comparisons made using Z-score test for proportions. IR and system-wide surgical procedural volume was compared with baseline values.ResultsSystem-wide IR procedural volume decreased by 35%, with a 41% decrease in outpatient and a 25% decrease in inpatient volume during the state-mandated order. DR volume decreased by 45%, with a 57% decrease in outpatient and a 22% decrease in inpatient volume. Total IR procedural volume during the mandate was 1077 versus 1518 during the preceding six weeks. The proportion of Interventional Oncology and dialysis interventions showed no significant change (p > 0.05) while that of drainage procedures increased (p < 0.05). Compared to baseline values, system-wide procedural volumes for IR, Vascular Surgery, Urology, General Surgery, Gastroenterology and Gynecology decreased by 3%, 11%, 25%, 20%, 38% and 31% in March 2020 and 25%, 47%, 68%, 63%, 79% and 73% in April 2020 respectively.ConclusionOutpatient IR volumes were less impacted compared to DR during the initial phase of COVID-19. Oncology, dialysis and drainage interventions may be considered essential procedures due to their stability. IR volumes were less affected compared to other procedural specialties.     

Physical activity,mental health and well-being of adults during initial COVID-19 containment strategies: A multi-country cross-sectional analysis

ObjectivesTo assess physical activity (PA), mental health and well-being of adults in the United Kingdom (UK), Ireland, New Zealand and Australia during the initial stages of National governments’ Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) containment responses.DesignObservational, cross-sectional.MethodsAn online survey was disseminated to adults (n = 8,425; 44.5 ± 14.8y) residing in the UK, Ireland, New Zealand and Australia within the first 2-6 weeks of government-mandated COVID-19 restrictions. Main outcome measures included: Stages of Change scale for exercise behaviour change; International Physical Activity Questionnaire (short-form); World Health Organisation-5 Well-being Index; and the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-9.ResultsParticipants who reported a negative change in exercise behaviour from before initial COVID-19 restrictions to during the initial COVID-19 restrictions demonstrated poorer mental health and well-being compared to those demonstrating either a positive-or no change in their exercise behaviour (p < 0.001). Whilst women reported more positive changes in exercise behaviour, young people (18-29y) reported more negative changes (both p < 0.001). Individuals who had more positive exercise behaviours reported better mental health and well-being (p < 0.001). Although there were no differences in PA between countries, individuals in New Zealand reported better mental health and well-being (p < 0.001).ConclusionThe initial COVID-19 restrictions have differentially impacted upon PA habits of individuals based upon their age and sex, and therefore have important implications for international policy and guideline recommendations. Public health interventions that encourage PA should target specific groups (e.g., men, young adults) who are most vulnerable to the negative effects of physical distancing and/or self-isolation.     

Performance of screening MRI in high risk patients at initial versus subsequent screen

PurposeTo compare the characteristics, outcomes, and performance metrics in women undergoing initial breast MRI screening versus subsequent screening.MethodsA retrospective database search identified screening MRIs performed at an academic practice from 2013 to 2015. MRIs were divided into two groups: (1) initial screens and (2) subsequent screens (interpreted with at least one prior MRI for comparison). Benignity was confirmed with pathology or >1-year follow-up. Malignancy was confirmed by pathology. Performance metrics were calculated. Comparisons were made using Binomial and Fisher's exact tests.ResultsWe observed a higher rate of abnormal interpretations (52% vs. 19%; p < 0.001) and rate of biopsy (49% vs. 15%; p < 0.001) in the initial versus subsequent screen group. The positive predictive value of biopsy was slightly lower at initial versus subsequent screen (17% vs. 19%, p = 0.99). However, the cancer detection rate was higher at initial than at subsequent screen (85 vs. 29/1000, p = 0.08). Sensitivity was higher at initial (100%) versus subsequent (88%) screen. However, the specificity at initial screen was low (55%) compared to subsequent screen (83%).ConclusionsThe higher rate of abnormal interpretations in the initial versus subsequent screen group in part reflects a prevalence screening. Although we observed more abnormal interpretations in the initial screen, this was likely justified by the significantly higher cancer detection. This evidence may be used to counsel patients and referring providers on the expected higher likelihood of recall from an initial screening MRI balanced with higher detection of malignancies. Findings also highlight the importance of having comparison MRIs to decrease false positives.     

Live Mammographic Screening Interpretation Versus Offline Same-Day Screening Interpretation at a Tertiary Cancer Center

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare screening mammography performance metrics for immediate (live) interpretation versus offline interpretation at a cancer center.MethodsAn institutional review board–approved, retrospective comparison of screening mammography metrics at a cancer center for January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019 (live period), and September 1, 2020, to March 31, 2022 (offline period), was performed. Before July 2020, screening examinations were interpreted while patients waited (live period), and diagnostic workup was performed concurrently. After the coronavirus disease 2019 shutdown from March to mid-June 2020, offline same-day interpretation was instituted. Patients with abnormal screening results returned for separate diagnostic evaluation. Screening metrics of positive predictive value 1 (PPV1), cancer detection rate (CDR), and abnormal interpretation rate (AIR) were compared for 17 radiologists who interpreted during both periods. Statistical significance was assessed using χ² analysis.ResultsIn the live period, there were 7,105 screenings, 635 recalls, and 51 screen-detected cancers. In the offline period, there were 7,512 screenings, 586 recalls, and 47 screen-detected cancers. Comparison of live screening metrics versus offline metrics produced the following results: AIR, 8.9% (635 of 7,105) versus 7.8% (586 of 7,512) (P = .01); PPV1, 8.0% (51 of 635) versus 8.0% (47 of 586); and CDR, 7.2/1,000 versus 6.3/1,000 (P = .50). When grouped by >10% AIR or <10% AIR for the live period, the >10% AIR group showed a significant decrease in AIR for offline interpretation (from 12.7% to 9.7%, P < .001), whereas the <10% AIR group showed no significant change (from 7.4% to 6.7%, P = .17).ConclusionsConversion to offline screening interpretation from immediate interpretation at a cancer center was associated with lower AIR and similar CDR and PPV1. This effect was seen largely in radiologists with AIR > 10% in the live setting.     

COVID-19 pandemic impacts physical activity levels and sedentary time but not sleep quality in young badminton athletes

Purpose

Regular physical activity is a good strategy to maintain the health of athletes, and prevent pain and decreased joint flexibility during the pandemic. On the other hand, higher sedentary time during the pandemic period can have deleterious effects. The objective of this study was to compare physical activity levels, sedentary time, and sleep parameters during the pre-COVID period and the COVID-19 pandemic period in young badminton athletes.

Methods

Fifteen young badminton athletes were evaluated during a pre-COVID period (July 2019) and during the COVID-19 period (July 2020). Sleep parameters, physical activity level, and sedentary time were measured using a tri-axial accelerometer. Participants wore the accelerometer on their dominant wrist for 7 days consecutively. In addition, the average of each sleep parameter [time in bed and total sleep time in hours per day, sleep efficiency (%), wake after sleep onset (WASO, total per day), and sleep latency (minutes per day)] was reported over the 7-day period.

Results

Athletes presented increased sedentary time (pre-COVID?=?7.0?±?1.1 vs.COVID-19?=?8.9?±?1.9 h/day, p?=?0.004, d?=?1.30) and significant decreases in the total PA observed in counts per day (pre-COVID?=?2,967,064.4?±?671,544.1 vs. COVID-19?=?1,868,210.2?±?449,768.4 counts/day, p?=?0.001, d?=?1.99), time in vigorous PA (pre-COVID?=?7.7?±?0.9 vs. COVID-19?=?6.1?±?1.2 h/day, p?=?0.001, d?=?1.56), and time in moderate-to-vigorous PA (pre-COVID?=?8.1?±?0.9 vs. COVID-19?=?6.5?±?1.3 h/day, p?=?0.001, d?=?1.48). There were no significant differences for time in light and moderate PA or in sleep parameters (p?>?0.05).

Conclusion

Young badminton athletes presented increased sedentary time, and decreased total physical activity, time in MVPA, and time in vigorous activities during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the pre-COVID period, however, there were no significant differences in sleep parameters.

     

Exacerbation of Inequities in Use of Diagnostic Radiology During the Early Stages of Reopening After COVID-19

ObjectiveAssess diagnostic radiology examination utilization and associated social determinants of health during the early stages of reopening after state-mandated shutdown of nonurgent services because of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsThis institutional review board–approved, retrospective study assessed all patients with diagnostic radiology examinations performed at an academic medical center with eight affiliated outpatient facilities before (January 1, 2020, to March 8, 2020) and after (June 7, 2020, to July 15, 2020) the COVID-19 shutdown. Examinations during the shut down (March 9, 2020, to June 6, 2020) were excluded. Patient-specific factors (eg, race, ethnicity), imaging modalities, and care settings were extracted from the Research Data Warehouse. Primary outcome was the number of diagnostic radiology examinations per day compared pre- and post-COVID-19 shutdown. Univariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression determined features associated with completing an examination.ResultsDespite resumption of nonurgent services, marked decrease in radiology examination utilization persisted in all care settings post-COVID-19 shutdown (869 examinations per day preshutdown [59,080 examinations in 68 days] versus 502 examinations per day postshutdown [19,594 examinations in 39 days]), with more significantly decreased odds ratios for having examinations in inpatient and outpatient settings versus in the emergency department. Inequities worsened, with patients from communities with high rates of poverty, unemployment, and chronic disease having significantly lower odds of undergoing radiology examinations post-COVID-19 shutdown. Patients of Asian race and Hispanic ethnicity had significantly lower odds ratios for having examinations post-COVID-19 shutdown compared with White and non-Hispanic patients, respectively.DiscussionThe COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated known pre-existing inequities in diagnostic radiology utilization. Resources should be allocated to address subgroups of patients who may be less likely to receive necessary diagnostic radiology examinations, potentially leading to compromised patient safety and quality of care.     

Radiology Imaging Volume Changes During Discrete COVID-19 Pandemic Waves: Implications for the Delta Variant of Coronavirus and Future Pandemics

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate radiology imaging volumes at distinct time periods throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic as a function of regional COVID-19 hospitalizations.MethodsRadiology imaging volumes and statewide COVID-19 hospitalizations were collected, and four 28-day time periods throughout the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 were analyzed: pre–COVID-19 in January, the “first wave” of COVID-19 hospitalizations in April, the “recovery” time period in the summer of 2020 with a relative nadir of COVID-19 hospitalizations, and the “third wave” of COVID-19 hospitalizations in November. Imaging studies were categorized as inpatient, outpatient, or emergency department on the basis of patient location at the time of acquisition. A Mann-Whitney U test was performed to compare daily imaging volumes during each discrete 28-day time period.ResultsImaging volumes overall during the first wave of COVID-19 infections were 55% (11,098/20,011; P < .001) of pre–COVID-19 imaging volumes. Overall imaging volumes returned during the recovery time period to 99% (19,915/20,011; P = .725), and third-wave imaging volumes compared with the pre–COVID-19 period were significantly lower in the emergency department at 88.8% (7,951/8,955; P < .001), significantly higher for outpatients at 115.7% (8,818/7,621; P = .008), not significantly different for inpatients at 106% (3,650/3,435; P = .053), and overall unchanged when aggregated together at 102% (20,419/20,011; P = .629).ConclusionsMedical imaging rebounded after the first wave of COVID-19 hospitalizations, with relative stability of utilization over the ensuing phases of the pandemic. As widespread COVID-19 vaccination continues to occur, future surges in COVID-19 hospitalizations will likely have a negligible impact on imaging utilization.     

Impact of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) on finding types leading to true-positive and false-positive examinations

PurposeTo investigate the frequencies of finding types with combined digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and digital mammography (DM) leading to true-positive (TP) and false-positive (FP) examinations.Materials and methodsConsecutive screening mammograms at an academic medical center from March 2008 to February 2011 (DM group) and from January 2013 to December 2017 (DBT/DM group) were retrospectively reviewed. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to compare the proportions of mammographic finding types leading to TP and FP examinations between the two groups.ResultsThe DM group had 554 TP and 7278 FP examinations, and the DBT/DM group had 1271 TP and 14,544 FP examinations. The finding type of calcifications led to a lower proportion of TP examinations in the DBT/DM than DM group (34.3% versus 47.7%, p < 0.001) but also a lower proportion of FP examinations (18.7% versus 21.7%, p < 0.001). Mass led to a higher proportion of TP examinations in the DBT/DM than DM group (5.7% versus 1.3%, p < 0.001) but also a higher proportion of FP examinations (4.6% versus 0.3%, p < 0.001). Asymmetry led to a higher proportion of TP examinations in the DBT/DM than DM group (58.3% versus 50.4%, p = 0.03) and a lower proportion of FP examinations (75.9% versus 77.6%, p < 0.001). Architectural distortion led a similar proportion of TP examinations in the DBT/DM and DM groups (1.7% versus 0.7%, p = 0.12) but a higher proportion of FP examinations (0.8% versus 0.4%, p = 0.007).ConclusionsMammographic findings leading to TP and FP examinations have shifted with the addition of DBT to DM.     

Pulmonary embolism severity before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objectives:Early in the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a high frequency of pulmonary embolism was identified. This audit aims to assess the frequency and severity of pulmonary embolism in 2020 compared to 2019.Methods:In this retrospective audit, we compared computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) frequency and pulmonary embolism severity in April and May 2020, compared to 2019. Pulmonary embolism severity was assessed with the Modified Miller score and the presence of right heart strain was assessed. Demographic information and 30-day mortality was identified from electronic health records.Results:In April 2020, there was a 17% reduction in the number of CTPA performed and an increase in the proportion identifying pulmonary embolism (26%, n = 68/265 vs 15%, n = 47/320, p < 0.001), compared to April 2019. Patients with pulmonary embolism in 2020 had more comorbidities (p = 0.026), but similar age and sex compared to 2019. There was no difference in pulmonary embolism severity in 2020 compared to 2019, but there was an increased frequency of right heart strain in May 2020 (29 vs 12%, p = 0.029). Amongst 18 patients with COVID-19 and pulmonary embolism, there was a larger proportion of males and an increased 30 day mortality (28% vs 6%, p = 0.008).Conclusion:During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a reduction in the number of CTPA scans performed and an increase in the frequency of CTPA scans positive for pulmonary embolism. Patients with both COVID-19 and pulmonary embolism had an increased risk of 30-day mortality compared to those without COVID-19.Advances in knowledge:During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of CTPA performed decreased and the proportion of positive CTPA increased. Patients with both pulmonary embolism and COVID-19 had worse outcomes compared to those with pulmonary embolism alone.