Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Clin Radiol ; 76(8): 553-558, 2021 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34053731

RESUMEN

We present a multimodality pictorial review of axillary lymphadenopathy in patients recently vaccinated against COVID-19. As the mass vaccination programme continues to be rolled out worldwide in an effort to combat the pandemic, it is important that radiologists consider recent COVID-19 vaccination in the differential diagnosis of unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy and are aware of typical appearances across all imaging methods. We review current guidelines on the management of unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy in the context of recent COVID-19 vaccination.


Asunto(s)
Axila/diagnóstico por imagen , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevención & control , Linfadenopatía/inducido químicamente , Linfadenopatía/diagnóstico por imagen , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Humanos , Vacunación Masiva , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Clin Radiol ; 75(9): 710.e9-710.e14, 2020 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32631626

RESUMEN

AIM: To validate the British Society of Thoracic Imaging issued guidelines for the categorisation of chest radiographs for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reporting regarding reproducibility amongst radiologists and diagnostic performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Chest radiographs from 50 patients with COVID-19, and 50 control patients with symptoms consistent with COVID-19 from prior to the emergence of the novel coronavirus were assessed by seven consultant radiologists with regards to the British Society of Thoracic Imaging guidelines. RESULTS: The findings show excellent specificity (100%) and moderate sensitivity (44%) for guideline-defined Classic/Probable COVID-19, and substantial interobserver agreement (Fleiss' k=0.61). Fair agreement was observed for the "Indeterminate for COVID-19" (k=0.23), and "Non-COVID-19" (k=0.37) categories; furthermore, the sensitivity (0.26 and 0.14 respectively) and specificity (0.76, 0.80) of these categories for COVID-19 were not significantly different (McNemar's test p=0.18 and p=0.67). CONCLUSION: An amalgamation of the categories of "Indeterminate for COVID-19" and "Non-COVID-19" into a single "not classic of COVID-19" classification would improve interobserver agreement, encompass patients with a similar probability of COVID-19, and remove the possibility of labelling patients with COVID-19 as "Non-COVID-19", which is the presenting radiographic appearance in a significant minority (14%) of patients.


Asunto(s)
Betacoronavirus , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico por imagen , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico por imagen , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Radiografía Torácica/métodos , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos , Anciano , COVID-19 , Femenino , Humanos , Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador , Pandemias , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensibilidad y Especificidad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...