CT-Guided Core-Needle Biopsy of Pulmonary Lesions Associated With Cystic Airspaces: A Case-Control Study.

Background: Concern may exist that pulmonary lesions associated with cystic airspaces are at risk of increased biopsy complications or lower biopsy accuracy given challenges in targeting tissue abutting or intermingled with the cystic airspaces. Objective: To evaluate the safety and diagnostic performance of CT-guided core-needle biopsy (CNB) of pulmonary lesions with cystic airspaces. Methods: This retrospective study included 90 patients (median age, 69.5 years; 28 female, 62 male) who underwent CT-guided CNB of pulmonary lesions associated with cystic airspaces (based on review of procedural images) from February 2010 to December 2022 and a matched control group (2:1 ratio) of 180 patients (median age, 68.0 years; 56 female, 124 male) who underwent CNB of noncystic noncavitary lesions during the same period. The groups were compared in terms of complications, nondiagnostic biopsies (i.e., nonspecific benignities, atypical cells, or insufficient specimens), and CNB diagnostic performance for detecting malignancy using as reference the final diagnosis from a joint review of all available records. For lesions associated with cystic airspaces that underwent surgical resection after CNB, histologic slides were re-reviewed to assess cystic airspace etiology. Results: The final diagnosis was malignant in 90% (81/90) of lesions associated with cystic airspaces and 92% (165/180) of noncystic noncavitary lesions. Patients with lesions associated with cystic airspaces and patients with noncystic noncavitary lesions showed no significant difference in frequencies of complication (all: 40% [36/90] vs 38% [68/180], p=.79; major: 4% [4/90] vs 6% [10/180], p=.78; minor: 36% [32/90] vs 32% [58/180], p=.59), frequency of nondiagnostic biopsies (12% [11/90] vs 9% [16/180], p=.40), or diagnostic performance (accuracy: 94.% [85/90] vs 97% [175/180], p=.50; sensitivity: 94% [76/81] vs 97% [160/165], p=.50; specificity: 100% [9/9] vs 100% [15/15]; p>.99), respectively. All false-negative results for malignancy in both groups occurred in patients with nondiagnostic CNB results. Among lesions associated with cystic airspaces that were resected after CNB (all malignant), the cystic airspaces most commonly represented tumor degeneration (22/31, 71%). Conclusion: CT-guided CNB is safe and accurate for assessing pulmonary lesions associated with cystic airspaces. Clinical Impact: CNB may help avoid a missed or delayed cancer diagnosis in pulmonary lesions with cystic airspaces.

Convolutional Neural Network-Based Automatic Analysis of Chest Radiographs for the Detection of COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Prioritizing Tool in the Emergency Department, Phase I Study and Preliminary "Real Life" Results.

The aim of our study is the development of an automatic tool for the prioritization of COVID-19 diagnostic workflow in the emergency department by analyzing chest X-rays (CXRs). The Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)-based method we propose has been tested retrospectively on a single-center set of 542 CXRs evaluated by experienced radiologists. The SARS-CoV-2 positive dataset (n = 234) consists of CXRs collected between March and April 2020, with the COVID-19 infection being confirmed by an RT-PCR test within 24 h. The SARS-CoV-2 negative dataset (n = 308) includes CXRs from 2019, therefore prior to the pandemic. For each image, the CNN computes COVID-19 risk indicators, identifying COVID-19 cases and prioritizing the urgent ones. After installing the software into the hospital RIS, a preliminary comparison between local daily COVID-19 cases and predicted risk indicators for 2918 CXRs in the same period was performed. Significant improvements were obtained for both prioritization and identification using the proposed method. Mean Average Precision (MAP) increased (p < 1.21 × 10−21 from 43.79% with random sorting to 71.75% with our method. CNN sensitivity was 78.23%, higher than radiologists' 61.1%; specificity was 64.20%. In the real-life setting, this method had a correlation of 0.873. The proposed CNN-based system effectively prioritizes CXRs according to COVID-19 risk in an experimental setting; preliminary real-life results revealed high concordance with local pandemic incidence.

Retrospective analysis of the application of CT scan in the emergency department to screen clinically asymptomatic COVID-19 before hospital admission.

BACKGROUND: The necessity to identify and isolate COVID-19 patients to avoid intrahospital cross infections is particularly felt as a challenge. Clinically occult SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients admitted to the hospital is always considered a risk during the pandemic. The aim of our study is to describe the application of CT scan to reveal unexpected COVID-19 in patients needing hospital admission. METHOD: In our emergency department, we prospectively enrolled adult patients needing hospital admission, without symptoms suspected of COVID-19, and showing negative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) swab test. CT scan was performed to diagnose clinically occult COVID-19 pneumonia. All the exams were read and discussed retrospectively by two expert radiologists and assigned to one of 4 exclusive diagnoses: typical (typCT), indeterminate (indCT), atypical (atyCT), negative (negCT). The clinical characteristics and final diagnoses were described and compared with the results of CT scans. RESULTS: From May 25 to August 18, 2020, we prospectively enrolled 197 patients. They showed 122 negCT, 52 atyCT, 22 indCT, and 1 typCT. Based on the CT imaging, the prevalence of suspected clinically occult COVID-19 pneumonia was 11.6% (23 patients). None had confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection after the hospital stay. Nineteen patients had negative serial RT-PCR while in 4 cases, the infection was excluded by clinical follow-up or appearance of positivity of RT-PCR after months. CONCLUSION: Our descriptive analysis confirms that CT scan cannot be considered a valid tool to screen clinically occult COVID-19, when the asymptomatic patients need hospitalization for other conditions. Application of personnel protections and distancing among patients remains the best strategies to limit the possibility of intrahospital cross-infections.

Baseline chest X-ray in coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) patients: association with clinical and laboratory data.

PURPOSE: To assess the reliability of CXR and to describe CXR findings and clinical and laboratory characteristics associated with positive and negative CXR. METHODS: Retrospective two-center study on consecutive patients admitted to the emergency department of two north-western Italian hospitals in March 2020 with clinical suspicion of COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR and who underwent CXR within 24 h of the swab execution. 260 patients (61% male, 62.8 ± 15.8 year) were enrolled. CXRs were rated as positive (CXR+) or negative (CXR-), and features reported included presence and distribution of airspace opacities, pleural effusion and reduction in lung volumes. Clinical and laboratory data were collected. Statistical analysis was performed with nonparametric tests, binary logistic regression (BLR) and ROC curve analysis. RESULTS: Sensitivity of CXR was 61.1% (95%CI 55-67%) with a typical presence of bilateral (62.3%) airspace opacification, more often with a lower zone (88.7%) and peripheral (43.4%) distribution. At univariate analysis, several factors were found to differ significantly between CXR+ and CXR-. The BLR confirmed as significant predictors only lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), C-reactive protein (CRP) and interval between the onset of symptoms and the execution of CXR. The ROC curve procedure determined that CRX+ was associated with LDH > 500 UI/L (AUC = 0.878), CRP > 30 mg/L (AUC = 0.830) and interval between the onset of symptoms and the execution of CXR > 4 days (AUC = 0.75). The presence of two out of three of the above-mentioned predictors resulted in CXR+ in 92.5% of cases, whereas their absence in 7.4%. CONCLUSION: CXR has a low sensitivity. LDH, CRP and interval between the onset of symptoms and the execution of CXR are major predictors for a positive CXR.

Helical-Tip Needle for Transthoracic Percutaneous Image-Guided Biopsy of Lung Tumors: Results of a Pilot Prospective Comparative Study with a Standard Tru-Cut Needle.

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate feasibility and diagnostic performance of the 14-gauge helical-tip (Spirotome™, Cook® Medical, Bloomington, USA) needle in transthoracic needle biopsy (TTNB) of lung lesions, compared to a conventional 18-gauge Tru-Cut needle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study was institutional review board approved, with informed consent obtained. Data from synchronous Spirotome and Tru-Cut image-guided TTNB of 20 consecutive patients with malignant peripheral lung tumors larger than 3 cm were enrolled for pathologic characterization and mutational analysis. Samples obtained with Spirotome and Tru-Cut needle were compared for fragmentation, length, weight, morphologic and immunohistochemistry typifying, tumor cellularity (TC) and DNA concentration. RESULTS: The technical success rate for TTNB with Spirotome was 100%, and no major complications occurred. Less fragmentation (mean 2 vs. 3 fragments, P = .418), greater weight (mean 13 vs. 8.5 mg, P = .027) and lower length (mean 10.2 vs. 12.6 mm, P = .174) were observed with Spirotome compared to Tru-Cut needle. Accuracy of Spirotome and Tru-Cut needle in defining cancer histotype was similar (90%). Absolute and relative TC (mean 42 vs. 38, 124 vs. 108/10HPF), and DNA concentration (mean 49.6 vs. 39.0 ng/µl) were higher with Spirotome compared to Tru-Cut needle, with no statistical significance (P = .787 and P = .140, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous 14-gauge Spirotome TTNB of selected lesions is feasible and accurate. It provides adequate samples for diagnosis, comparable to 18-gauge Tru-Cut needle, with a higher amount of tumor tissue (weight, TC, DNA concentration) even in shorter samples.