key: cord-1032491-3pufo24l authors: Khatami, Fatemeh; Saatchi, Mohammad; Zadeh, Seyed Saeed Tamehri; Aghamir, Zahra Sadat; Shabestari, Alireza Namazi; Reis, Leonardo Oliveira; Aghamir, Seyed Mohammad Kazem title: A meta-analysis of accuracy and sensitivity of chest CT and RT-PCR in COVID-19 diagnosis date: 2020-12-28 journal: Sci Rep DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-80061-2 sha: 10f77579b30e15c00334a2a4eaf685353766b55c doc_id: 1032491 cord_uid: 3pufo24l Nowadays there is an ongoing acute respiratory outbreak caused by the novel highly contagious coronavirus (COVID-19). The diagnostic protocol is based on quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and chests CT scan, with uncertain accuracy. This meta-analysis study determines the diagnostic value of an initial chest CT scan in patients with COVID-19 infection in comparison with RT-PCR. Three main databases; PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and EMBASE were systematically searched for all published literature from January 1st, 2019, to the 21st May 2020 with the keywords "COVID19 virus", "2019 novel coronavirus", "Wuhan coronavirus", "2019-nCoV", "X-Ray Computed Tomography", "Polymerase Chain Reaction", "Reverse Transcriptase PCR", and "PCR Reverse Transcriptase". All relevant case-series, cross-sectional, and cohort studies were selected. Data extraction and analysis were performed using STATA v.14.0SE (College Station, TX, USA) and RevMan 5. Among 1022 articles, 60 studies were eligible for totalizing 5744 patients. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of chest CT scan compared to RT-PCR were 87% (95% CI 85–90%), 46% (95% CI 29–63%), 69% (95% CI 56–72%), and 89% (95% CI 82–96%), respectively. It is important to rely on the repeated RT-PCR three times to give 99% accuracy, especially in negative samples. Regarding the overall diagnostic sensitivity of 87% for chest CT, the RT-PCR testing is essential and should be repeated to escape misdiagnosis. Among 1022 identified articles, 115 were considered eligible and after the NOS screening, 60 articles, including 5744 subjects were included, all published in the first quarter of 2020 (Fig. 1) . A summary of the information of included articles is shown in Table 1 . The forest plot, False Positives (FP), False Negatives (FN), True Positives (TP), True Negatives (TN), Sensitivity, Specificity, and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) of each study are shown in Fig. 2 . Sensitivity ranged from 25 to 100% and the specificity was estimated to vary from 19 to 70%. After excluding studies reporting 100% sensitivity or specificity, the sensitivity was ranging from 25 to 97% and specificity from 25 to 70% (Figs. 3, 4) . Based on 37 studies, the sensitivity of CT compared to PCR was 87% (95% CI 85-90%) and based on seven studies the specificity of CT was 46% (95% CI 29-63%). The positive predictive value of CT was 69% (95% CI 56-72%) and the negative predictive value was 89% (95% CI 82-96%) and the variation of the estimated numbers were 33% to 97% and 33% to 96% for PPV and NPV, respectively (Figs. 5, 6) . The symmetry between the two sides of the funnel plot regression line indicates that the included publications are not biased. However, due to a large number of zeros in the FP and TN cells, it was possible to calculate the odds ratio for six studies only, and the interpretation of this plot in our study should be done with caution (Fig. 7) . Table 2 includes 35 studies with the first RT-PCR test of the suspected patients available (subsequent RT-PCR data were included if available). Moreover, the swabs should have been taken from sputum, nasopharyngeal, oropharyngeal, nose, or throat and if a combination was used, nasopharyngeal or throat swab was considered as the primary. The COVID-19 diagnosis was confirmed by positive result of the first, second, third, and fourth RT-PCR tests and also information of patients who had negative results until the fourth test or no more than one test conducted, but considered as confirmed or most likely ill later according to more RT-PCR tests or examining other swabs, clinical manifestations, typical chest CT scan's features or developmental changes in the series of CT scans or a mixture of prior methods. In the articles with more than 10 total confirmed patients (first 10 articles included), the RT-PCR test could diagnose 58.9% of the COVID-19 infected patients in the first test, and about 41.1% of infected patients could not be recognized in the first place by RT-PCR test. Among these 10 articles, 5 included the information of second tests (number 1, 2, 3, 7 and 9). In these five articles, the mean percentage of secondary diagnosed patients divided by total confirmed patients is 18.6%. Out of 4 articles (number 1, 2, 3 and 7) with the exact data of thirdly and fourthly conducted tests, the mean percentage of positivity are 6.3% and 0.7%, respectively. Moreover, the percentage of patients who were not diagnosed after 4 times of repeating the test is 8.6% (in the previous 4 articles). The numbers and sequences of primers and probes could be influential on PCR sensitivity and specificity which were surveyed in Table 3 www.nature.com/scientificreports/ As we can see in Table 3 , in the case report by Wendong Hao 44 , using one pair of primer and probe did not indicate a positive result at first but in the fourth repeated test. In another case report by Feng Ly 65 , the oropharyngeal swab by detection of N gene showed a positive result in the third, fourth, and fifth time, whereas ORF1ab detection showed a positive result in the fifth examination. On the other hand, Xavier Marchand-Senécal et al. 67 and Yosuke Hirotsu et al. 61 reported 2 cases that were diagnosed initially with one pair of primer and probe of PCR test. By using 2 pairs of primer and probe, the mean of initially detecting patients divided by total confirmed patients is 51.3% in the 4 studies above. Also, Qing Chen 52 findings with the utilization of 3 pairs of primer and probe caused 100% of initially discovering COVID-19 patients 52 . Moreover, using 7 sets of primers and probes also resulted positively for the first test 61 . Based on limited data available, it seems that the greater the number of primer and probe, more likely to initially detect patients, although more specific information is needed from future studies. Considering the outcomes of RT-PCR as a reference, in our meta-analysis, the sensitivity and specificity of initial chest CT scan for detecting patients, who were highly suspicious for COVID-19, were 87% and 43% respectively. The PPV and NPV of CT scans were 67% and 84% respectively. It means that 67% of individuals with positive chest CT scans had positive RT-PCR and 84% of individuals with negative chest CT scans had negative RT-PCR. So, a chest CT scan may have beneficial diagnostic features as adjuvant diagnostic tool compared to RT-PCR 36, 68 . Tao Ai and colleagues studying 1014 patients, 888 (88%) with a positive chest CT scan and 601 with a positive RT-PCR for COVID-19, described 97%, 25%, 65%, and 83% of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for the CT scan, respectively. The relatively high sensitivity and low specificity in this study might be related to the low odds ratio of positive RT-PCR, considered as the reference test 69 , as suggested by the World Health Organization (WHO) 70 . Some patients have typical chest CT scan findings and symptoms for COVID-19 but their initial RT-PCR results were negative agreeing with previous research reports 19, 36, 44 . Fang et al. described 15 out of 51 patients who have an initial negative RT-PCR while their chest CT scan was positive 36, 44 , so it is very important to pay attention to chest CT scan, epidemiologic features, and clinical symptoms. Furthermore, a combination of humoral (IgG-IgM antibody) and cellular immunity, in addition to RT-PCR could refine the detection of COVID-19 23, 49 . www.nature.com/scientificreports/ The results of Chan and colleagues indicated that among 273 specimens (15 COVID-19 positives), the RdRp-P2 test showed 77 positive specimens and the RdRp/Hel test showed 42 positives. Moreover, RdRp/Hel analysis did not cross-reacted with any human coronaviruses or other respiratory pathogens while RdRp-P2 analysis reacted to SARS-CoV either 71 . Another study expressed that the sensitivity of N gene assay in finding the positive samples is 10 times higher than the ORF-1b gene assay 72 . In February, 280 suspected patients with clinical manifestations of COVID-19 were tested in the Marseille hospital. None of the patients were positive for SARS-COV-2 73 . Guo-Qing Qian et al. reported that all the patients, except three of them, were confirmed with the second RT-PCR test 18 . In the study by Tao Ai et al., it is highlighted that out of 1014 patients, 308 patients with negative PCR results, were strongly perceived as infected by clinical manifestations and CT scans. The percentage of a positive test for the first, second, third, and fourth tests were 37.7%, 22.6%, 5%, and 0.9%, respectively. Unfortunately, about 33.9% of the patients could not be diagnosed even with the fourth test. CT scans were positive in 580 of 601 (97%) COVID-19 confirmed patients by the RT-PCR test and in 308 of 413(74.6%) patients with negative RT-PCR assay 74 . In a retrospective analysis, among 51 patients, 98% (50/51) had abnormal CT, besides 70.6% (36/51) had positive PCR assay initially and about 30% of the tests became positive after second, third, and fourth scanning 44 . A study of five children suggested that four children had positive PCR outcomes within the first assay, but one with COVID-19 suggestive CT findings turned positive after six times of examining 35 . It is also possible that negative RT-PCR with three times of repeating, turns positive on the fourth test, while CT demonstrated typical features such as GGO 44 . Chest CT presented rapidly developing multiple patchy consolidations and GGOs in both lungs of a case reported by J Wei, while in the later stage, there was the development of fibrosis. So with high-resolution CT, it will be easier to find GGOs in the early stage 75 . What stands out from Table 2 is that 58.9% of the infected COVID-19 patients could be recognized in the first test and about 18.6%, 6.3% and 0.7% could be diagnosed in the further second, third and fourth tests, respectively. Besides, about 9% of the infected patients have not been detected, even after the fourth test. According to the results and due to the PCR's cost and time consumption, it seems that repeating the test up to 3 times is reasonable in patients with initially negative results (with 24 h to 3 days' time interval based on literature). Also, CT scan findings and clinical manifestation should be encountered in all patients, especially in suspected ones with multiple negative PCRs. About 80% of COVID-19 patients have mild disease and just about 15% of them will reach severe stages. Positive RT-PCR results usually have a high positive predictive value, but negative RT-PCR should be repeated three times to increase the negative predictive value up to 98% (57% at first test, 34% at second one, and 7% at third time). If the patient's death is due to COVID-19, but their PCR is negative, even if their chest CT is positive, their cause of death would not report COVID-19. Some patients with negative PCR result die, but based on our results, 87% of them are Covid-19 positive and their disease should be confirmed by repeating PCR for up to three times. On the other hand, the exact place of chest CT is for staging the COVID-19 disease as mild, moderate, and severe, instead of being a screening tool. Some antibody and serology testing can support the RT-PCR test. A study in two patients with COVID-19 pneumonia by Lin and colleagues indicated the presence of ground-glass lesions and patchy consolidations in repeated chest CT 76 . Also, the lesions were classically accompanied by bronchial bundles or subpleural lesions. In patients who have a fever but not having the previous contact with the epidemic area, the appropriate finding of the COVID-19 RNA is compulsory to guarantee the high efficacy of treatment 76 . We acknowledge that our study had some limitations: (1) the specificity of CT scan was not as reliable as the sensitivity, due to the majority of studies' nature, which were case-series and the number of true negative patients in those studies were zero. (2) It has been postulated in Bernheim et al. 's study that the chance of detecting lung involvement in chest CT scan will be increased if the duration between symptom onset and initial chest CT scan rises and this duration was different among 60 studies. www.nature.com/scientificreports/ www.nature.com/scientificreports/ In conclusion, the results of the present systematic review and meta analysis shed new light on the comparison between chest-CT scan and rRT-PCR validity in terms of diagnosis in patients with COVID-19. Due to lower diagnostic sensitivity of chest-CT scan in comparison to rRT-PCR, performing rRT-PCR is mandatory for any individuals with suspicious symptoms. Nevertheless, the initial negative rRT-PCR result is not fully able to roll out COVID-19 in all cases and because of that, repeating the test for three times is vital to roll out COVID-19. Information, data, and photos will be provided if they are requested. Received: 6 May 2020; Accepted: 16 December 2020 Table 3 . From the information illustrated in Table 2 , those which their primer and probe's data were available. Chest CT findings in coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19): Relationship to duration of infection Coronavirus disease 2019 ( COVID-19): situation report Characteristics of and important lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China: Summary of a report of 72 314 cases from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR Medical journals and the 2019-nCoV outbreak Laboratory diagnosis of emerging human coronavirus infections-the state of the art Epidemiologic features and clinical course of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Singapore Imaging features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Evaluation on thin-section CT A comparative study on the clinical features of COVID-19 pneumonia to other pneumonias Chest CT features of COVID-19 in Pregnancy and perinatal outcomes of women with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pneumonia: A preliminary analysis Incidental findings suggestive of COVID-19 in asymptomatic patients undergoing nuclear medicine procedures in a high prevalence region Emerging coronavirus 2019-nCoV pneumonia Time course of lung changes on chest CT during recovery from 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia Analysis of CT features of 15 children with 2019 novel coronavirus infection. Zhonghua er ke za zhi = Chin A familial cluster of pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus indicating person-to-person transmission: A study of a family cluster Clinical characteristics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 reactivation Epidemiologic and clinical characteristics of 91 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Zhejiang, China: A retrospective, multi-centre case series Performance of radiologists in differentiating COVID-19 from viral pneumonia on chest CT Clinical and CT imaging features of the COVID-19 pneumonia: Focus on pregnant women and children Clinical characteristics and intrauterine vertical transmission potential of COVID-19 infection in nine pregnant women: A retrospective review of medical records Clinical characteristics of imported cases of COVID-19 in Jiangsu province: A multicenter descriptive study Evaluation of coronavirus in tears and conjunctival secretions of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection Computed tomographic imaging of 3 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia with negative virus real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction test Clinical and computed tomographic (CT) images characteristics in the patients with COVID-19 infection: What should radiologists need to know CT imaging and clinical course of asymptomatic cases with COVID-19 pneumonia at admission in Wuhan Clinical features of pediatric patients with COVID-19: A report of two family cluster cases Arbidol combined with LPV/r versus LPV/r alone against Corona Virus Disease 2019: A retrospective cohort study CT imaging features of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) A case report of COVID-19 with false negative RT-PCR test: Necessity of chest CT Clinical characteristics of non-critically ill patients with novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) in a Fangcang Hospital Spinal anaesthesia for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 and possible transmission rates in anaesthetists: Retrospective, single-centre, observational cohort study Epidemiological and clinical features of 125 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in CT features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia in 62 patients in Wuhan Clinical characteristics of 225 patients with COVID-19 in a tertiary Hospital near Wuhan Correlation of chest CT and RT-PCR testing in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A report of 1014 cases Chest radiographic and CT findings of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Analysis of nine patients treated in Korea Clinical characteristics and imaging manifestations of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19): A multicenter study in Wenzhou city Clinical features and dynamics of viral load in imported and non-imported patients with COVID-19 Construction and evaluation of a novel diagnosis process for 2019-Corona Virus Disease Imaging and clinical features of patients with 2019 novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Epidemiological and initial clinical characteristics of patients with family aggregation of COVID-19 Radiological findings and clinical characteristics of pregnant women with COVID-19 pneumonia Sensitivity of chest CT for COVID-19: Comparison to RT-PCR The presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in feces of COVID-19 patients Clinical features and chest CT manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a Single Clinical features of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in the early stage from a fever clinic in Beijing. Zhonghua jie he he hu xi za zhi = Zhonghua jiehe he huxi zazhi = Chin Asymptomatic and presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections in residents of a long-term care skilled nursing facility Radiographic predictors of therapeutic operative intervention after blunt abdominal trauma: The RAPTOR score Comparison of throat swabs and sputum specimens for viral nucleic acid detection in 52 cases of novel coronavirus (SARS-Cov-2)-infected pneumonia (COVID-19) Saliva is a reliable tool to detect SARS-CoV-2 Use of chest CT in combination with negative RT-PCR assay for the 2019 novel coronavirus but high clinical suspicion Caution should be exercised for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, especially in the elderly Co-infection of coronavirus disease 2019 and influenza A: A report from Iran SARS-CoV-2 and Legionella co-infection in a person returning from a Nile Cruise SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) in febrile infants without respiratory distress The enlightenment from two cases of asymptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2: Is it safe after 14 days of isolation? Atypical lung feature on chest CT in a lung adenocarcinoma cancer patient infected with COVID-19 Diagnosis and management of first case of COVID-19 in Canada: Lessons applied from SARS A case of imported COVID-19 diagnosed by PCR-positive lower respiratory specimen but with PCR-negative throat swabs Environmental cleaning is effective for the eradication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in contaminated hospital rooms: A patient from the Diamond Princess cruise ship Lung ultrasound and computed tomographic findings in pregnant woman with COVID-19 Novel coronavirus in a 15-day-old neonate with clinical signs of sepsis, a case report Mortality of a pregnant patient diagnosed with COVID-19: A case report with clinical, radiological, and histopathological findings Dynamic change process of target genes by RT-PCR testing of SARS-Cov-2 during the course of a Coronavirus Disease 2019 patient Case report: Walking pneumonia in novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Mild symptoms with marked abnormalities on chest imaging Diagnosis and management of first case of COVID-19 in Canada: Lessons applied from SARS Next-generation radiogenomics sequencing for prediction of EGFR and KRAS mutation status in NSCLC patients using multimodal imaging and machine learning algorithms Clinical characteristics of children with coronavirus disease 2019 in Hubei Epigenome aberrations: Emerging driving factors of the clear cell renal cell carcinoma Improved molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 by the novel, highly sensitive and specific COVID-19-RdRp/Hel real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction assay validated in vitro and with clinical specimens Molecular diagnosis of a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) causing an outbreak of pneumonia Rapid viral diagnosis and ambulatory management of suspected COVID-19 cases presenting at the infectious diseases referral hospital Preliminary investigation on feline coronavirus presence in the reproductive tract of the tom cat as a potential route of viral transmission novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia: Serial computed tomography findings Novel coronavirus pneumonia outbreak in 2019: Computed tomographic findings in two cases Special thanks to Urology Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. The authors declare no competing interests. The online version contains supplementary material available at https ://doi. org/10.1038/s4159 8-020-80061 -2.Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to S.M.K.A.Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creat iveco mmons .org/licen ses/by/4.0/.