Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 Infection Screening before Thoracic Surgery during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Fiorelli, Silvia; Menna, Cecilia; Piccioni, Federico; Zuanetti, Gabriele; Valenza, Franco; Rispoli, Marco; Amore, Dario; Rocco, Monica; Rendina, Erino Angelo; Ibrahim, Mohsen; Massullo, Domenico

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/8993295

International Journal of Clinical Practice

On this page

Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Conclusion Abbreviations Data Availability Conflicts of Interest Authors’ Contributions Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2023 | Article ID 8993295 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/8993295

Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 Infection Screening before Thoracic Surgery during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Silvia Fiorelli,¹Cecilia Menna,²Federico Piccioni,³Gabriele Zuanetti,⁴Franco Valenza,^5,6Marco Rispoli,⁷Dario Amore,⁸Monica Rocco,¹Erino Angelo Rendina,²Mohsen Ibrahim,²and Domenico Massullo¹

Academic Editor: Marta Laranjo

Received25 Feb 2022

Revised17 Jan 2023

Accepted04 Feb 2023

Published04 Mar 2023

Abstract

Objectives. During coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, preoperative screening before thoracic surgery is paramount in order to protect patients and staff from undetected infections. This study aimed to determine which preoperative COVID-19 screening tool was the most effective strategy before thoracic surgery. Methods. This retrospective cohort multicenter study was performed at 3 Italian thoracic surgery centers. All adult patients scheduled for thoracic surgery procedures from 4th March until 24th April, 2020, and submitted to COVID-19 preoperative screenings were included. The primary outcome was the yield of screening of the different strategies. Results. A total of 430 screenings were performed on 275 patients; 275 anamnestic questionnaires were administered. 77 patients were screened by an anamnestic questionnaire and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). 78 patients were selected to combine screening with anamnestic questionnaire and chest computed tomography (CT). The positive yield of screening using a combination of anamnestic questionnaire and RT-PCR was 7.8% (95% CI: 2.6–14.3), while using a combination of anamnestic questionnaire and chest CT was 3.8% (95% CI: 0–9). Individual yields were 1.1% (95% CI: 0–2.5) for anamnestic questionnaire, 5.2% (95% CI: 1.3–11.7) for RT-PCR, and 3.8% (95% CI: 0–9). Conclusions. The association of anamnestic questionnaire and RT-PCR is able to detect around 8 positives in 100 asymptomatic patients. This combined strategy could be a valuable preoperative SARS-CoV-2 screening tool before thoracic surgery.

1. Introduction

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been challenging healthcare systems worldwide. Elective surgery has been suggested to be limited in order to reduce patients’ traffic and to avoid virus spread [1]. Globally, at least 28 million elective operations have been deleted as a result of the first severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic waves [2]. Perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications and is burdened by high mortality. Mortality rate is 23.8% compared with 2% in patients without COVID-19 [3]. Despite this critical situation, there are different pathological conditions in the lung and thorax which need soonest possible surgical intervention, such as lung cancer. This condition remains the commonest cause of malignancy death worldwide and it is paramount to guarantee adequate cares and avoid unmotivated delays, protecting at the same time this frail population from an eventual contagion [4].

The role of preoperative testing for SARS-CoV-2 in surgical pathways is still not proven. Potentially, identifying presymptomatic or asymptomatic patients with undetected SARS-CoV-2 infection could help to optimize outcomes by postponing elective surgery [5], and also protect healthcare workers (HCWs) from a possible cross infection. On the other hand, evidence and universally accepted strategies are lacking, thus time and costs of screening (i.e., financial and resources) should also be considered. The widely employed screening tool to detect SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA [6] is nasopharyngeal swab test with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT–PCR). Some authors have also suggested thoracic computed tomography (CT) as preoperative screening, especially before major surgeries [7, 8]. The administration of an anamnestic questionnaire prior to hospitalization is a simple screening test. The questionnaire is designed to check for any history of potential SARS-CoV-2 exposure or COVID-19-related symptoms. This questionnaire enables preidentification of patients suspected of being infected with SARS-CoV-2, and thereby could help reducing cross infections of patients and HCWs [9].

The efficacy and outcome of these screening programs are still not well known. The present retrospective study assessed the results of the COVID-19 screening protocols in three different institutions before thoracic surgery in order to determine the most effective protocol with the best positive yield.

2. Methods

This multicenter retrospective study was approved by the Bioethics Committee of Sapienza University of Rome (no. 7008_2020), and conformed to the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was conducted at three Italian thoracic surgical centers from March 4th to April 24th, 2020. All adult patients scheduled for any thoracic surgery and submitted to preoperative SARS-CoV-2 screening were included. Electronic medical records, anesthesia records, preoperative evaluation records, nursing records, laboratory findings, chest x-rays, and CT examinations for all patients were reviewed. Preoperative testing was defined as any test used to identify patient’s SARS-CoV-2 status in the 48 hours before surgery. Testing strategies included in this analysis were as follows: anamnestic questionnaire; swab test, defined as nasopharyngeal swab and identification of viral RNA by RT-PCR; imaging by thoracic CT; combined swab test and anamnestic questionnaire; and combined thoracic CT and anamnestic questionnaire. Preoperative screening tests were requested according to local protocol.

3. Anamnestic Questionnaire

A COVID-19 anamnestic questionnaire was administered before hospitalization in order to detect a possible SARS-CoV-2 infection (Table 1). The items in the questionnaire are designed to check for any history of contact within the past 14 days with any confirmed COVID-19 case, a history of travel, fever (37.5°C), respiratory symptoms (coughing, sputum, and sore throat), severe muscle ache, loss of the sense of smell and/or taste, and diarrhea [10].

4. RT-PCR

Nasopharyngeal swab-PCR SARS-CoV-2 testing was based on the World Health Organization (WHO) protocol [11]. If SARS-CoV-2 infection was diagnosed, surgery was postponed (at least 14 days from the end of symptoms and after negative swab-PCR result).

5. Chest-CT

Preoperative noncontrast computed tomography (CT) of the chest was performed. Unifocal or multifocal ground-glass opacities were considered as suspicious or positive for COVID-19. In case of positive CT screening, patients underwent swab and RT-PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA.

6. Statistics

Screening results were presented as the number and percentage of patients with a positive screening result, with additional percentages and 95% confidence intervals (CI’s), calculated using 1,000 bootstrapping samples. All statistical analysis was performed with SPSS software, version 26 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY).

7. Results

Between March 4th and April 24th, 2020, a total of 275 patients were scheduled for thoracic surgery procedures and submitted to preoperative screening in the participating thoracic surgery centers: 275 anamnestic questionnaires were administered, 77 patients were screened by a combination of anamnestic questionnaire and RT-PCR, and 78 patients underwent anamnestic questionnaire and chest CT according to local screening protocol (Figure 1). Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients included in the study are given in Table 2. The results for patients who underwent preoperative screening are given in Table 3. Out of 275 patients, 12 (4.3%) had positive screening results. Of these patients, three tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 using anamnestic questionnaire, four were screened using RT-PCR, while three were suspected for COVID-19 based on chest CT results.

7.1. Follow-Up Data

Of the three patients with a positive questionnaire, only two had infection confirmation by RT-PCR. Surgery was delayed in all patients (six) with positive screening RT-PCR; among these, only two patients developed COVID-19 symptoms. Of the three patients who had positive screening results in the chest CT, two resulted in positive RT-PCR testing, and the surgery was postponed. Among patients submitted to surgery with negative screening at questionnaire and RT-PCR, two patients developed COVID-19 symptoms within two weeks postoperatively.

8. Discussion

This is the first multicenter study to determine the yield of screening for COVID-19 using anamnestic questionnaire, thoracic CT, and RT-PCR in asymptomatic patients prior to elective thoracic surgery procedures. Combined preoperative screening with anamnestic questionnaire and RT-PCR demonstrated a yield of 7.8%, while combined preoperative screening with anamnestic questionnaire and chest CT demonstrated a yield of 3.8%.

During pandemic, a careful preoperative screening is becoming necessary to identify undetected SARS-CoV-2 infections. Considering that it has been reported that up to 50% of the cases of COVID-19 infection are asymptomatic or infectious in the presymptomatic phase [12], screening in nonsymptomatic patients scheduled for surgery could have a critical role.

Perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection has been related to considerable postoperative mortality and morbidity for surgical patients [13]. Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality, especially in cancer or major surgery [3]. In addition, after surgery, there is a possible increased susceptibility to COVID-19 due to the proinflammatory cytokine and immunosuppressive responses to surgery and mechanical ventilation [14] and increased risk of postoperative complications and mortality [15].

During pandemic undetected infections can lead to cross infections in both patients and staff. Adequate use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs), such as endotracheal intubation and airway surgical or endoscopic procedures, and a COVID-19 specific intraoperative management are paramount in order to prevent cross infections [16]. Although guidelines have been published for the management of surgical patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, so far, few studies of surgical patients have been reported, and little is known about preoperative routine screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection among surgical patients [4, 17].

Anamnestic questionnaire is a simple and rapid screening tool that has not been well investigated or standardized. A retrospective study including 2,197 consecutive patients showed that about 75% of patients with increased body temperature had positive findings in the systematic questionnaire screen for COVID-19 [18]. Although this tool can be subtly effective in identifying some symptomatic patients, it is not currently standardized, and its reproducibility is not certain [5]. The anamnestic screening could also help to anticipate a subsequent positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Certainly, the anamnestic questionnaire is at no cost while the PCR and CT scan have a high expense for the hospital. In addition, especially for mixed hospitals (with COVID- and NOT-COVID-patients), committing radiology units to perform CT scans of COVID patients delays the daily work schedule, since rooms and instruments require to be sanitized by interrupting normal activity.

As the possibility of infection transmission from asymptomatic or presymptomatic patients is currently known [12], screening of the patients merely based on the anamnestic questionnaire is no longer sufficient in high prevalence areas [19]. In this study, the anamnestic questionnaire as a sole method of COVID-19 screening resulted insufficient with the lowest positive yield (1.1%).

Nucleic-acid-based testing which is mainly RT-PCR on the nasopharyngeal swab samples is considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection [5, 7]. An international cohort study involving 8,784 patients demonstrated that preoperative RT-PCR in asymptomatic patients was associated with a reduced rate of postoperative pulmonary complications, leading to significant benefit in major surgery and in high-risk areas. However, a relevant proportion of patients are false-negative at test (2–29%) [20], and the diagnostic accuracy remains challenging. RT-PCR sensitivity and accuracy are affected by several factors, including the type of samples, inadequate specimen quality, the timing of collection (too early or too late), sampling methods, training of operators, specimens improperly handled or transported, and quality of detection reagent or RT-PCR instrument [21]. Despite presenting the factors which may affect the result of the RT-PCR, and also considering the modest positive predictive value of RT-PCR in asymptomatic patients, it would still be advantageous to postpone the surgery or repeat the test (in case of emergency needs to the surgery) [19, 22]. Conversely, in low-risk countries, testing costs and procedural delays outweigh the benefits of screening. In fact, in populations with a low disease prevalence (<2%), RT-PCR screening failed to prove its advantages in clinical practice [23]. In these situations, screening can be more powerful with a symptom questionnaire. An additional screening with PCR testing in high-risk patient groups could be considered [24] in order to improve the positive yield, as demonstrated in this study (7.8% with combined screening vs. 5.2% with RT-PCR only).

Another screening tool for COVID-19 that has been proposed and hotly debated is thoracic CT [25]. CT could be feasible as a screening since patients may have abnormalities on chest imaging before the onset of symptoms. The potential value and advantage of CT is that it is widely available and rapid. During early stage of pandemic some studies reported that CT has high sensitivity and specificity in the evaluation of suspected COVID-19 pneumonia [26, 27]. A more recent meta-analysis, however, showed that in a low disease prevalence area the positive predictive value of CT scan can be up to ten times lower than that of RT-PCR, related to a low CT specificity [28]. Several studies confirmed that in contrast to the high sensitivity (93–98%), chest CT scan has a low specificity in detecting COVID-19 pulmonary alterations in symptomatic patients (25–71%) [26, 27, 29]. When used as a screening tool in identifying COVID-19, CT scan demonstrated a sensitivity of 68.4% and specificity of 88% [30]. According to this study, several reports showed no additional benefit in adding CT scan to other screenings such as anamnestic questionnaire and RT-PCR [5, 7, 24, 31], and a low positive yield in asymptomatic preoperative patients [7, 8, 32, 33]. In particular, the SCOUT multicentric study demonstrated a positive yield of 0.7% (95%CI: 0.2–1.1) for chest CT scan, 1.1% (95%CI: 0.6–1.7) for RT-PCR, and 1.5% (95%CI: 0.8–2) using a combination of chest CT scan and RT-PCR, highlighting the limited value of adding chest CT scan to RT-PCR screening [7]. It can be suggested that currently chest CT scan has no additional value in the preoperative screening of asymptomatic patients.

Considering pandemic in Italy, on April 7th, 2020, the number of notified COVID-19 cases in Italy was above 135,000. The epidemic was disproportionately hitting some northern areas, with a prevalence that varied among Italian regions from 11.2% in the Lombardy region, to 0.57% and 0.53% in Lazio and Campania region, respectively [34]. Despite the differences in prevalence among the different centers, the positive yield of the CT scan was not increased in the area with the highest prevalence [34].

The current study has some limitations. First, patients undergoing preoperative screening were included retrospectively. Second, the study was conducted during the lockdown period in Italy, which effectively started on March 9th, 2020. Consequently, a decreasing prevalence during the inclusion period may have led to a decreasing yield. Third, another limit is the small sample size of the study. Finally, no further analysis for risk factors could be performed due to the limited number of patients with positive results. Moreover, the present study population consisted of surgical patients and thus was not fully representative for the general population. Finally, bias related to the employed screening tool, bias from missing data, and selection bias of reported outcomes could not be excluded.

9. Conclusion

This study evaluated preoperative COVID‐19 screening in the early pandemic in thoracic surgery. Using a combination of anamnestic questionnaire and RT-PCR as preoperative scrrening tool demonstrated to be able to properly detect infected patients with SARS-CoV-2 in almost 8 in every 100 asymptomatic patients. Another combination, anamnestic questionnaire and chest CT scan, would have a lower value in detecting the infected persons. Therefore, due to its simplicity and feasibility, all patients can be screened for symptoms before presenting to the hospital through an anamnestic questionnaire. Indeed, further research is needed to identify and standardize the optimal preoperative screening strategy applicable to different societal context.

Abbreviations

AGPs:	Aerosol-generating procedures
CIs:	Confidence intervals
COVID-19:	Coronavirus disease
CT:	Computed tomography
DLTs:	Double-lumen tubes
HCWs:	Healthcare workers
PPE:	Personal protective equipment
RT–PCR:	Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction
SARS-CoV-2:	Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
WHO:	World Health Organization.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available upon request (silvia.fiorelli@uniroma1.it).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

Silvia Fiorelli, Cecilia Menna, Mohsen Ibrahim, and Domenico Massullo conceptualized the study, performed methodology, and wrote the original draft. Federico Piccioni and Franco Valenza performed data curation and wrote the original draft. Gabriele Zuanetti and Dario Amore performed visualization and investigation. Marco Rispoli, Monica Rocco, and Erino Angelo Rendina performed supervision. Mohsen Ibrahim, Silvia Fiorelli, and Cecilia Menna wrote, reviewed, and edited the article. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Carla Conversi for data management. The author received no specific funding for this article.

References

M. Brindle, M. Ariadne, and A. Gawande, “Managing COVID-19 in surgical systems,” Annals of Surgery, pp. 2–4, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
COVIDSurg Collaborative, “Elective surgery cancellations due to the COVID-19 pandemic: global predictive modelling to inform surgical recovery plans,” British Journal of Surgery, vol. 107, no. 11, pp. 1140–1149, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Nepogodiev, A. Bhangu, J. C. Glasbey et al., “Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study,” The Lancet, vol. 396, no. 10243, pp. 27–38, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Fiorelli, D. Massullo, C. Andreetti et al., “Perspectives in surgical and anaesthetic management of lung cancer in the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19),” European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 676–681, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
COVIDSurg Collaborative, “Preoperative nasopharyngeal swab testing and postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing elective surgery during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic,” British Journal of Surgery, vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 88–96, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Watson, P. F. Whiting, J E. F. Brush, and J. E. Brush, “Interpreting a covid-19 test result,” BMJ, vol. 369, p. 1808, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C A J. Puylaert, F. Daams, A B J. Borgstein et al., “Yield of Yield of Screening for COVID-19 in Asymptomatic Patients Before Elective or Emergency Surgery Using Chest CT and RT-PCR (SCOUT)creening for COVID-19 in asymptomatic patients before elective or emergency surgery using chest CT and RT-PCR (SCOUT): multicenter study,” AnnAnnals of Surgery, vol. 272, no. 6, pp. 919–924, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Ap Dafydd, M. O’Mahony, W. Allum et al., “The role of CT chest in screening for asymptomatic COVID-19 infection in self-isolating patients prior to elective oncological surgery: findings from a UK Cancer Hub,” The British Journal of Radiology, vol. 94, no. 1117, Article ID 20200994, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Hur, M. C. Chang, and M. C. Chang, “Usefulness of an Usefulness of an Online Preliminary Questionnaire under the COVID-19 Pandemicnline preliminary questionnaire under the COVID-19 pandemic,” Journal of Medical Systems, vol. 44, no. 7, pp. 116–2, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Q. Li, X. Guan, L. Zhou et al., “Early Early Transmission Dynamics in Wuhan, China, of Novel Coronavirus–Infected Pneumoniaransmission dynamics in wuhan, China, of novel coronavirus–infected pneumonia,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 382, no. 13, pp. 1199–1207, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V M. Corman, O. Landt, T. Bleicker et al., “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR,” Euro Surveillance, vol. 25, no. 3, Article ID 2000045, 8 pages, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M M. Arons, L. P. Oakley, S C. Reddy et al., “Presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infections and Transmission in a Skilled Nursing Facilitynfections and transmission in a skilled nursing facility,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 382, no. 22, pp. 2081–2090, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Doglietto, M. Vezzoli, M. Domenicucci et al., “Factors Factors Associated With Surgical Mortality and Complications Among Patients With and Without Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Italyssociated with surgical mortality and complications among patients with and without coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Italy,” Journal of the American Medical Association Surg, vol. 155, no. 8, pp. 691–702, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Huang, Y. Wang, J. Zhao et al., “Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China,” The Lancet, vol. 395, no. 10223, pp. 497–506, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Besnier, J. J. Tuech, L. Schwarz, and L. Schwarz, “We asked the experts: covid-19 outbreak: is there still a place for scheduled surgery ? Reflection from pathophysiological data,” World Journal of Surgery, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1695–1698, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Fiorelli, C. Menna, E A. Rendina et al., “The The Cutting Edge of Thoracic Anesthesia During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreakutting edge of thoracic anesthesia during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak,” Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 3203–3210, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Salmerón Jiménez, F. Hermoso Alarza, I. Martínez Serna et al., “Clinical features and outcomes of thoracic surgery patients during the COVID-19 pandemic,” European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 738–744, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Story, E. Coyle, B. Ou Yang, S. Sidiropoulos, A. Devapalasundaram, and T. Coulson, “Documenting COVID-19 screening before surgery during lockdown (COVID Screen): Documenting COVID-19 screening before surgery during lockdown (COVID Screen): an audit with routinely collected health datan audit with routinely collected health data,” Australian Health Review, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 723–727, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Tenenbein, S. Riazi, K. Karkouti et al., “The case for routine screening for SARS-CoV-2 before surgery,” Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d’anesthésie, vol. 67, no. 10, pp. 1315–1320, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Woloshin, N. Patel, A. S. Kesselheim, and A. S. Kesselheim, “False False Negative Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Infection — Challenges and Implicationsegative tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection - challenges and implications,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 383, no. 6, p. e38, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Song, X. Zhang, Y. Zha, W. Liu, Y. Zha, and W. Liu, “COVID‐19: Recommended sampling sites at different stages of the diseaseecommended sampling sites at different stage of the disease,” Journal of Medical Virology, vol. 92, no. 9, pp. 1383–1385, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Safety As of Aap,Foundation, “The ASA and APSF joint statement on perioperative testing for the COVID-19 virus,” 2020, https://www.asahq.org/about-asa/newsroom/news-releases/2020/04/asa-and-apsf-joint-statement-on-perioperative-testing-for-the-covid-19-virus.
View at: Google Scholar
H B. Gershengorn, P. R. Warde, D M. Nguyen et al., “Pre-procedural screening for COVID-19 with nasopharyngeal polymerase chain reaction testing,” British Journal of Anaesthesia, vol. 125, no. 5, pp. e422–e424, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E M. Huybens, M. P. A. Bus, R A. Massaad et al., “What is the preferred screening tool for COVID-19 in asymptomatic patients undergoing a surgical or diagnostic procedure?” World Journal of Surgery, vol. 44, no. 10, pp. 3199–3206, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Chatzaraki, R. A. Kubik-Huch, B. Wiggli et al., “Preoperative chest computed tomography in emergency surgery during COVID-19 pandemic,” Journal of Perioperative Practice, Article ID 175045892110244, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Ai, Z. Yang, C. Chen et al., “Correlation of Correlation of Chest CT and RT-PCR Testing for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A Report of 1014 Caseshest CT and RT-PCR testing in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: a report of 1014 cases,” Radiology, vol. 296, no. 2, Article ID 200642, pp. E32–E40, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Fang, H. Zhang, L. Ying et al., “Sensitivity of Sensitivity of Chest CT for COVID-19: Comparison to RT-PCRhest CT for COVID-19: comparison to RT-PCR,” Radiology, vol. 296, no. 2, Article ID 200432, pp. E115–E117, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Kim, H. Hong, S H. Yoon, and S. H. Yoon, “Diagnostic Diagnostic Performance of CT and Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction for Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Meta-Analysiserformance of CT and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction for coronavirus disease 2019: a meta-analysis,” Radiology, vol. 296, no. 3, pp. E145–E155, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Caruso, M. Zerunian, T. Polidori et al., “Chest CT Chest CT Features of COVID-19 in Rome, Italyeatures of COVID-19 in Rome, Italy,” Radiology, vol. 296, no. 2, pp. E79–E85, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Callaway, S. Harden, K. Drinkwater et al., “A national UK audit for diagnostic accuracy of preoperative CT chest in emergency and elective surgery during COVID-19 pandemic,” Clinical Radiology, vol. 75, no. 9, pp. 705–708, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Stessel, I. Callebaut, S. Evers et al., “Evaluation of a comprehensive pre-procedural screening protocol for COVID-19 in times of a high SARS CoV-2 prevalence: a prospective cross-sectional study,” Annals of Medicine, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 337–344, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Gümüs, Z. U. Kabaoglu, B. Coskun et al., “Preoperative computerized tomography screening for COVID-19 pneumonia in asymptomatic patients: experiences from two centers,” Japanese Journal of Radiology, vol. 39, no. 3, Article ID 0123456789, pp. 240–245, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Uchida, S. Uno, S. Matsumoto et al., “CT screening for COVID-19 in asymptomatic patients before hospital admission,” Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 232–236, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Signorelli, T. Scognamiglio, A. Odone, and A. Odone, “COVID-19 in Italy: impact of containment measures and prevalence estimates of infection in the general population,” Acta bio-medica: Atenei Parmensis, vol. 91, no. 3-S, pp. 175–179, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2023 Silvia Fiorelli et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies