Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros











Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Bras Pneumol ; 46(5): e20200226, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés, Portugués | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32965310

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of a chest X-ray (CXR) score and of clinical and laboratory data in predicting the clinical course of patients with SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. METHODS: This is a pilot multicenter retrospective study including patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to the ERs in three hospitals in Italy between February and March of 2020. Two radiologists independently evaluated the baseline CXR of the patients using a semi-quantitative score to determine the severity of lung involvement: a score of 0 represented no lung involvement, whereas scores of 1 to 4 represented the first (less severe) to the fourth (more severe) quartiles regarding the severity of lung involvement. Relevant clinical and laboratory data were collected. The outcome of patients was defined as severe if noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or intubation was necessary, or if the patient died. RESULTS: Our sample comprised 140 patients. Most of the patients were symptomatic (132/138; 95.7%), and 133/140 patients (95.0%) presented with opacities on CXR at admission. Of the 140 patients, 7 (5.0%) showed no lung involvement, whereas 58 (41.4%), 31 (22.1%), 26 (18.6%), and 18 (12.9%), respectively, scored 1, 2, 3, and 4. In our sample, 66 patients underwent NIV or intubation, 37 of whom scored 1 or 2 on baseline CXR, and 28 patients died. CONCLUSIONS: The severity score based on CXR seems to be able to predict the clinical progression in cases that scored 0, 3, or 4. However, the score alone cannot predict the clinical progression in patients with mild-to-moderate parenchymal involvement (scores 1 and 2).


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico por imagen , Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Pandemias , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico por imagen , Radiografía Torácica/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Italia/epidemiología , Pulmón/fisiopatología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Síndrome Respiratorio Agudo Grave , Rayos X
2.
J. bras. pneumol ; J. bras. pneumol;46(5): e20200226, 2020. tab, graf
Artículo en Inglés | LILACS | ID: biblio-1134899

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of a chest X-ray (CXR) score and of clinical and laboratory data in predicting the clinical course of patients with SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Methods: This is a pilot multicenter retrospective study including patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to the ERs in three hospitals in Italy between February and March of 2020. Two radiologists independently evaluated the baseline CXR of the patients using a semi-quantitative score to determine the severity of lung involvement: a score of 0 represented no lung involvement, whereas scores of 1 to 4 represented the first (less severe) to the fourth (more severe) quartiles regarding the severity of lung involvement. Relevant clinical and laboratory data were collected. The outcome of patients was defined as severe if noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or intubation was necessary, or if the patient died. Results: Our sample comprised 140 patients. Most of the patients were symptomatic (132/138; 95.7%), and 133/140 patients (95.0%) presented with opacities on CXR at admission. Of the 140 patients, 7 (5.0%) showed no lung involvement, whereas 58 (41.4%), 31 (22.1%), 26 (18.6%), and 18 (12.9%), respectively, scored 1, 2, 3, and 4. In our sample, 66 patients underwent NIV or intubation, 37 of whom scored 1 or 2 on baseline CXR, and 28 patients died. Conclusions: The severity score based on CXR seems to be able to predict the clinical progression in cases that scored 0, 3, or 4. However, the score alone cannot predict the clinical progression in patients with mild-to-moderate parenchymal involvement (scores 1 and 2).


RESUMO Objetivo: Investigar a acurácia diagnóstica de um escore de radiografia de tórax (RxT) e também de dados clínicos e laboratoriais na previsão da evolução clínica de pacientes com infecção por SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Métodos: Estudo piloto multicêntrico retrospectivo incluindo pacientes com infecção por SARS-CoV-2 internados nos PSs de três hospitais na Itália entre fevereiro e março de 2020. Dois radiologistas avaliaram as RxT iniciais dos pacientes de forma independente utilizando um escore semiquantitativo para determinar a gravidade do comprometimento pulmonar: escore 0 representava ausência de comprometimento pulmonar, enquanto escores de 1 a 4 representavam o primeiro (menos grave) ao quarto (mais grave) quartil de gravidade do comprometimento pulmonar. Coletaram-se dados clínicos e laboratoriais relevantes. O desfecho dos pacientes foi definido como grave se foi necessária ventilação não invasiva (VNI) ou intubação ou se o paciente faleceu. Resultados: Nossa amostra foi composta por 140 pacientes. A maioria era sintomática (132/138; 95,7%), e 133/140 (95,0%) apresentavam opacidades na RxT da admissão. Dos 140 pacientes, 7 (5,0%) não apresentavam comprometimento pulmonar, enquanto 58 (41,4%), 31 (22,1%), 26 (18,6%) e 18 (12,9%), respectivamente, receberam escore 1, 2, 3 e 4. Em nossa amostra, 66 pacientes foram submetidos a VNI ou intubação, 37 dos quais receberam escore 1 ou 2 na RxT inicial, e 28 pacientes faleceram. Conclusões: O escore de gravidade baseado em RxT parece ser capaz de prever a evolução clínica em casos com escore 0, 3 ou 4. No entanto, o escore isoladamente não consegue prever a evolução clínica de pacientes com comprometimento leve a moderado do parênquima (escores 1 e 2).


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico por imagen , Radiografía Torácica/métodos , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico por imagen , Pandemias , Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Rayos X , Estudios Retrospectivos , Síndrome Respiratorio Agudo Grave , Betacoronavirus , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 , Italia/epidemiología
3.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 189(5): 1223-37, 2007 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17954665

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MR angiography and unenhanced time-of-flight MR angiography for the detection of significant peripheral arterial occlusive disease using digital subtraction angiography as our reference standard. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Two hundred seventy-two patients underwent MR angiography and digital subtraction angiography of the iliofemoral arteries. MR angiography was performed before (2D time-of-flight acquisitions) and after (spoiled gradient-echo acquisitions) the administration of 0.1 mmol/kg of gadobenate dimeglumine at 1-2 mL/s. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography and digital subtraction angiography of the calf arteries were performed in 241 of 272 participants. Images were evaluated on-site and by four blinded reviewers (three for MR angiography, one for digital subtraction angiography). Comparative diagnostic performance for the detection of significant (> or = 51% vessel lumen narrowing) disease was evaluated using the McNemar test and generalized estimating equations. Interobserver agreement was assessed with generalized kappa statistics. The chi-square test was used to compare technical failure rates. RESULTS: Digital subtraction angiography confirmed significant disease (597 stenoses, 386 occlusions) in 983 iliofemoral segments. The sensitivity (54-80.9%), specificity (89.7-95.3%), and accuracy (85-87.5%) of contrast-enhanced MR angiography for the detection of significant iliofemoral disease were significantly (p < 0.001, all reviewers) better than those of time-of-flight MR angiography (33.2-62.8%, 74.3-88.9%, and 68-77.3%, respectively). Similar diagnostic performance was obtained for the calf arteries. The technical failure rate with contrast-enhanced MR angiography (2.5-3.4%) was similar to that of digital subtraction angiography (1.4%) and significantly (p < 0.001) lower than that of time-of-flight MR angiography (6.2-18.0%). Significantly better reproducibility (p < 0.001) was obtained with contrast-enhanced MR angiography (82% vs 65.2% agreement; kappa = 0.66 vs 0.45). CONCLUSION: Improved diagnostic performance and reproducibility are achievable with gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MR angiography in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease.


Asunto(s)
Arteriopatías Oclusivas/diagnóstico , Aumento de la Imagen/métodos , Angiografía por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Meglumina/análogos & derivados , Compuestos Organometálicos/uso terapéutico , Enfermedades Vasculares Periféricas/diagnóstico , Muslo/irrigación sanguínea , Muslo/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Medios de Contraste , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Meglumina/uso terapéutico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , América del Sur
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA