Published April 2021 | Version v1
Journal article

Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver variability of CO-RADS in patients with suspected coronavirus disease-2019. A multireader validation study

  • 1. Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Santa Maria Goretti Hospital, 04100, Latina (Italy)
  • 2. Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, "Sapienza" University of Rome, I.C.O.T. Hospital, Via Franco Faggiana, 1668, 04100, Latina (Italy)
  • 3. Infectious Diseases Unit, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Santa Maria Goretti Hospital, 04100, Latina (Italy)

Description

To conduct a multireader validation study to evaluate the interobserver variability and the diagnostic accuracy for the lung involvement by COVID-19 of COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) score. This retrospective study included consecutive symptomatic patients who underwent chest CT and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from March 2020 to May 2020 for suspected COVID-19. Twelve readers with different levels of expertise independently scored each CT using the CO-RADS scheme for detecting pulmonary involvement by COVID-19. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were computed to investigate diagnostic yield. Fleiss' kappa statistics was used to evaluate interreader agreement. A total of 572 patients (mean age, 63 ± 20 [standard deviation]; 329 men; 142 patients with COVID-19 and 430 patients without COVID-19) were evaluated. There was a moderate agreement for CO-RADS rating among all readers (Fleiss' K = 0.43 [95% CI 0.42-0.44]) with a substantial agreement for CO-RADS 1 category (Fleiss' K = 0.61 [95% CI 0.60-0.62]) and moderate agreement for CO-RADS 5 category (Fleiss' K = 0.60 [95% CI 0.58-0.61]). ROC analysis showed the CO-RADSscore ≥ 4 as the optimal threshold, with a cumulative area under the curve of 0.72 (95% CI 66-78%), sensitivity 61% (95% CI 52-69%), and specificity 81% (95% CI 77-84%). CO-RADS showed high diagnostic accuracy and moderate interrater agreement across readers with different levels of expertise. Specificity is higher than previously thought and that could lead to reconsider the role of CT in this clinical setting.

Additional details

Identifiers

Publishing Information

Journal Title
European Radiology
Journal Volume
31
Journal Issue
4
Journal Page Range
p. 1932-1940
ISSN
0938-7994
CODEN
EURAE3