Abstract
Purpose To compare the performance of chest computed tomography (CT) scan versus reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in the initial diagnostic assessment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.
Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A search of electronic information was conducted to identify all relevant studies comparing the diagnostic performance of chest CT scan versus RT-PCR in COVID-19 suspected cases. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were primary outcome measures. Secondary outcome measures included other test performance characteristics, discrepant findings between both investigations and main chest CT findings. Random effects modelling was used for the analyses.
Results Eight non-randomised retrospective studies enrolling 1910 patients were identified. Chest CT was more sensitive but less specific than RT-PCR. Accuracy was not statistically significantly different between chest CT and RT-PCR for the identification and exclusion of COVID-19 cases (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.40, P = 0.15) in the context of hospitalised patients in a pandemic. Chest CT was shown to detect patients with false-negative RT-PCR results and true positives. Ground-glass opacities and consolidations were the most common chest CT manifestations.
Conclusions Chest CT is not superior to RT-PCR for the initial detection of COVID-19 and has more false positives. It is likely to be useful in confirming COVID-19 in patients with a suspicious clinical presentation, but who have a false-negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test.
Key Points
‐ Chest computed tomography (CT) is more sensitive but less specific in detecting and excluding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) when compared to reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).
‐ Accuracy of chest CT is not significantly different from RT-PCR for COVID-19 cases.
‐ Chest CT can detect false-negative and true-positive RT-PCR cases.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Institutional Review Board approval was not required because it amalgamates readily available published data.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Abbreviation Stands for
- RCT
- Randomised Controlled Trial
- CIs
- Confidence Intervals
- OR
- Odds Ratio
- PRISMA
- Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
- AHRQ
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
- RT-PCR
- Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction
- COVID-19
- Coronavirus Disease 2019
- SARS
- Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
- MERS
- Middle East Respiratory Syndrome
- ARDS
- Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
1
Blogs/Media
Author Videos