Abstract
Differently from computed tomography (CT), well-defined terminology for chest radiography (CXR) findings and standardized reporting in the setting of known or suspected COVID-19 are still lacking. We propose a revision of CXR major imaging findings in SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia derived from the comparison of CXR and CT, suggesting a precise and standardized terminology for CXR reporting. This description will consider asymptomatic patients, symptomatic patients, and patients with SARS-CoV-2-related pulmonary complications. We suggest using terms such as ground-glass opacities, consolidation, and reticular pattern for the most common findings, and characteristic chest radiographic pattern in presence of one or more of the above-mentioned findings with peripheral and mid-to-lower lung zone distribution.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Chest radiography (CXR) quickly became the initial imaging modality for the diagnosis and clinical management of COVID-19 pneumonia in many countries, despite lower sensitivity than computed tomography (CT) [1]. CXR has several advantages, including lower risk of contamination, lower costs and radiation exposure, and higher availability. Most EU and US imaging guidelines recommend the use of CXR as the initial imaging modality for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially in high prevalence settings [2, 3].
Thus, for patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, CXR is routinely performed, while chest CT is generally reserved for cases with a discrepancy between clinical, laboratory, and radiologic findings.
Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia show typical CT imaging findings which are well described in the literature [3,4,5]. The expert consensus statement on reporting chest CT, published by the Radiological Society of North America, provides standardized terminology based on typical, indeterminate, and atypical features [3]. In contrast, a well-defined terminology and a standardized reporting for CXR imaging in COVID-19 pneumonia are still lacking, with multiple terms that have been used, such as alveolar opacities, reticular opacities, reticulo-nodular opacities, mild opacities, ground–glass opacities, and consolidation.
Our aim is to provide a series of cases illustrating CXR major findings in COVID-related pneumonia and to suggest precise and standardized terminology for CXR reporting, thanks to the comparison with CT. In order to do that, we decided to use definitions from “Glossary of terms for thoracic imaging” published by the multidisciplinary Fleischner Society [6].
This description will consider three common clinical scenarios in patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection: asymptomatic patients, symptomatic patients, and patients with pulmonary complications related to COVID-19 pneumonia.
Typical COVID-19 pneumonia CXR findings in clinical scenarios
Asymptomatic patients
Statements from world-wide scientific societies agree that imaging is not recommended for the diagnosis and management of asymptomatic individuals with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection [2, 7, 8].
Despite this, there was a significant increase in rates of chest CT utilization in ED following the start of the COVID pandemic, compared to pre-pandemic baseline [9]. It is desirable a stricter observation of the guidelines addressing new waves of this pandemic and/or future pandemics with the objective of avoiding inappropriate CT exams and of reducing infection risks [9, 10].
In most asymptomatic patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, CXR shows no lung abnormalities [11]. On the contrary, according to a meta-analysis conducted by Vafea and colleagues [12], chest CT showed positive results in 63% of asymptomatic patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The most common CT finding was ground–glass opacity (GGO) in 71%, which may be not detected on CXR [12].
Teaching points:
Imaging is not indicated in asymptomatic patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 without risk factors for disease progression.
In asymptomatic COVID-19 patients the most common CT finding is bilateral GGO, while chest radiography has limited value.
Symptomatic patients
Not all symptomatic patients with COVID-19 have an abnormal CXR, with varying percentages reported depending on the population studied. In one large series of non-hospitalized patients presenting to an urgent care, 58.3% had a normal CXR and an additional 30.7% had only mild radiographic abnormalities [13]. In contrast, 69% of hospitalized patients had an abnormal CXR at the time of hospital admission on one study [1].
The most typical CXR lung abnormalities of COVID-19 pneumonia are discussed below.
Ground–glass opacity
Ground–glass opacity (GGO) is defined on both, CXR and CT scans, as hazy increased lung opacity within which margins of pulmonary vessels are still visible, and less dense than consolidation which obscures vessel walls (Fig. 1) [6].
GGO depicted on CT is often not radiographically visible. In addition, the lower anatomic resolution of CXR can lead to an overlap of opacities, making harder to distinguish pure GGO from crazy paving or consolidation, that instead are well identified on CT (Figs. 2, 3, and 4).
GGO represents a typical finding of COVID-19 pneumonia during the acute exudative phase of lung injury, often referred to as acute diffuse alveolar damage (DAD), which typically occurs within 7 days of infection onset (Fig. 1) [14, 15].
As a result, suboptimal CXR diagnostic performance is expected in patients who have experienced symptoms for few days (Fig. 5) [16].
In the early phase of COVID-19 pneumonia, GGO typically presents as patchy areas, with a peripheral distribution in the lower lungs. As the disease progresses, GGO tend to become more confluent and the extent of abnormalities increases [17]. Progression is well depicted both on CXR and CT [18].
Another common CT finding of COVID-19 pneumonia, usually seen with clinical progression towards the peak stage of disease, is crazy-paving. This CT pattern is similar to ground glass, with superimposed thickened interlobular and intralobular septa [17, 19]. Based on our experience, CXR is unable to distinguish this pattern from GGO alone, or from a combination of GGO with early consolidation (Figs. 6 and 7).
Consolidation
Consolidation is a homogeneous increase in lung density that obscures the margins of vessels and airways walls, the latter appearing as air bronchograms [6]. While CXR can accurately detect pulmonary consolidation, it commonly underestimates their extent [20]. For example, Choi et al. [20] compared a series of CXRs and CTs performed on the same day in the same patients with COVID-19, with CXR detecting only 25% of the lung abnormalities; the study concluded that the disease extension was the main factor driving the visibility of lung opacities on CXR. Similarly, Ippolito et al. [18] reported CXR sensitivity of 57% for COVID pneumonia, with higher values when the symptom onset was 5 days or more, typically when there is a greater lung involvement.
Despite this, an abnormal CXR has clinical utility and validity in quantifying the extent of COVID-19 pneumonia as a marker of severity, particularly when there is extensive and severe disease [21].
In patients with COVID-19, consolidation is a hallmark of organizing pneumonia, most commonly seen during progressive and peak stages of the disease, 5–13 days after symptom onset (Figs. 8 and 9) [17, 19, 22]. This seems to reflect the “organizing phase” of diffuse alveolar damage (DAD), which has been reported as the main histopathologic process in COVID-19 pneumonia [23, 24].
Reticular pattern
Reticular pattern is defined as a collection of innumerable small linear opacities that by summation produce an appearance resembling a net [6]. Reticulation is more easily seen at thin-section CT as interlobular and intralobular septal thickening. While reticulation has been described as more common than alveolar opacities on CXR in COVID-19 patients, these two patterns are usually seen together [18, 25]. When reticulation is the predominant pattern in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, the main differential diagnosis is the acute interstitial edema, particularly in elderly patients with a high probability of having underlying heart disease.
Reticulation, in combination with other patterns, is more frequent in the advanced phase of COVID-19 pneumonia, often described as the “reabsorption phase,” characterized by the gradual decrease in density of GGO and consolidation and the presence of areas of parenchymal distortion (Figs. 10 and 11) [15, 19].
Definition of a characteristic chest radiographic pattern
While the lung abnormalities described above are not pathognomonic of COVID-19 pneumonia, in the context of a pandemic with a high pre-test probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the presence of these findings is highly suggestive of COVID-19 pneumonia [26].
The pattern of bilateral patchy or confluent ground–glass opacities and/or consolidation in the lung periphery with a mid-to-lower lung distribution is the most common (Fig. 12) and is the radiographic equivalent of the CT typical pattern described in the joint statement on reporting by American College of Radiology, Radiologic Society of North America and Society of Thoracic Radiology [3].
Teaching point:
Chest radiography can help clinicians by raising a suspicion for COVID-19 infection in symptomatic patients.
In the setting of a high prevalence of COVID-19, the presence of bilateral patchy or confluent ground-glass opacities or consolidation in a peripheral and mid-to-lower lung zone distribution is highly suggestive for COVID-19 pneumonia.
Temporal changes of typical COVID-19 patterns on chest radiography reflect those reported by longitudinal studies of chest CT.
Chest radiography of COVID-19 complications
The clinical outcome of symptomatic patients with COVID-19 pneumonia generally correlates with the extent and severity of lung involvement, and patients with severe lung disease have a higher risk of developing complications [27, 28].
In particular, COVID-19 is a risk factor for pulmonary embolism (PE) or pulmonary in situ thrombosis, and it has been postulated that such complications may already be present at the moment of the hospital admission [29].
CT pulmonary angiography is the most accurate test for the diagnosis of PE, with an incidence of 17–35% in patients with COVID-19 who underwent CT angiography [30].
CXR has a limited value in the diagnosis of PE but it may raise the suspicion of it when there is evidence of pulmonary infarction: a triangular or dome-shaped opacity with the base abutting the pleural surface and the apex directed toward the hilum [6].
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is the most common cause for patient admission to intensive care unit (ICU), and the main cause of mortality in COVID-19 patients [5]. On CXR, rapid progression of bilateral alveolar opacities, which tend to have a dependent distribution, within 7–12 days after the onset of COVID-19 should raise the suspicion for ARDS (Figs. 13 and 14) [30, 31]. In the late phase of ARDS, imaging can depict signs of fibrotic organizing pneumonia, with architectural distortion and traction bronchiectasis [31].
Patients with severe COVID-19 on mechanical ventilation with high-positive pressure or continuous positive airway pressure (cPAP) can develop barotrauma events including pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum (Fig. 15) [32, 33].
Despite the low frequency of coinfections described in patients with COVID-19, early diagnosis of superimposed pneumonia is crucial due to the association with poor outcomes [34]. Hospital-acquired bacterial or fungal infections are frequent in ICU patients [35]. CXR can help in diagnosing a superimposed bacterial infection showing typical radiographic features such as unilateral lobar or segmental air-space opacities with or without air bronchograms (Fig. 16).
Furthermore, the evidence on CXR of multiple pulmonary nodules or lung cavitation should promptly raise the suspicion of superimposed fungal and/or mycobacterial infection or necrotizing bacterial infection (Fig. 17).
Teaching point:
Chest radiography represents a valid imaging tool for monitoring COVID-19 patients with severe pulmonary disease suspected of developing complications, particularly those with clinical deterioration and for detecting barotrauma in patients under mechanical ventilation or cPAP.
COVID-19 pneumonia follow-up
The risk of developing long-term pulmonary sequelae after COVID-19 is still subject to debate. CXR features in the follow-up of patients recovering from COVID-19 pneumonia are not well described and deserve more extensive research. Vice versa, longitudinal studies of COVID-19 survivors discharged from the hospital are focused on chest CT findings. They show that lung abnormalities are relatively common after SARS-CoV-2 and may persist up to 12 months after discharge [28, 36]. The lung abnormalities tend to reduce in extent at 1-year follow-up; the improvement in radiologic findings over time is in line with data from SARS-CoV-1 in which the prevalence of lung abnormalities also decreased with time. Parenchymal bands and reticulations are among the most common CT findings at follow-up and seem to be sign of organizing pneumonia rather than markers of fibrosis [37, 38].
Conclusion
In patients with suspicion of COVID-19 pneumonia, the use of the terms ground–glass opacities, consolidation, and reticular pattern is suggested on CXR. Then, location of these findings should be reported, with peripheral and mid-to-lower lung zone distribution being a characteristic CXR pattern of COVID-19 pneumonia and highly suggestive for the diagnosis particularly in population with high prevalence of COVID-19 infection. Other typical findings of COVID-19 pneumonia, such as a crazy-paving pattern, can be easily shown on chest CT, but are difficult to be detected or differentiated from ground–glass, consolidative, and reticular abnormalities on CXR.
Similarly to CT, CXR findings and their extent can help to define the phase of this viral pneumonia, to monitor the disease, and potentially to predict outcomes.
References
Wong HYF, Lam HYS, Fong AH-T, et al (2020) Frequency and distribution of chest radiographic findings in COVID-19 positive patients. Radiology 201160https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020201160
Nair A, Rodrigues JCL, Hare S et al (2020) A British Society of Thoracic Imaging statement: considerations in designing local imaging diagnostic algorithms for the COVID-19 pandemic. Clin Radiol 75:329–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2020.03.008
Simpson S, Kay FU, Abbara S et al (2020) Radiological Society of North America Expert Consensus document on reporting chest CT findings related to COVID-19: endorsed by the Society of Thoracic Radiology, the American College of Radiology, and RSNA. Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging 2:e200152. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryct.2020200152
Chung M, Bernheim A, Mei X et al (2020) CT imaging features of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Radiology 295:202–207. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200230
Salehi S, Abedi A, Balakrishnan S, Gholamrezanezhad A (2020) Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review of imaging findings in 919 patients. Am J Roentgenol 215:87–93. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.20.23034
Hansell DM, Bankier AA, Mcloud TC et al (2008) Fleischner Society : glossary of terms for thoracic imaging. Radiology 246:697–722. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2462070712
Rubin GD, Ryerson CJ, Haramati LB et al (2020) The role of chest imaging in patient management during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multinational consensus statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiology 296:172–180. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020201365
Akl EA, Blažić I, Yaacoub S et al (2021) Use of chest imaging in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19: a WHO rapid advice guide. Radiology 298:E63–E69. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020203173
Loftus TM, Wessling EG, Cruz DS et al (2022) Impact of the COVID pandemic on emergency department CT utilization: where do we go from here? Emerg Radiol 29:879–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-022-02071-z
Lopes N, Vernuccio F, Costantino C et al (2020) An Italian guidance model for the management of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients in the primary care setting. Front Public Health 8:1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.572042
Kuo BJ, Lai YK, Tan MLM, Goh X-YC (2021) Utility of screening chest radiographs in patients with asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic COVID-19 in Singapore. Radiology 298:E131–E140. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020203496
Tsikala Vafea M, Atalla E, Kalligeros M et al (2020) Chest CT findings in asymptomatic cases with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Radiol 75:876.e33-876.e39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2020.07.025
Weinstock MB, Echenique A, Russel JW et al (2020) Chest x-ray findings in 636 ambulatory patients with COVID-19 presenting to an urgent care center: a normal chest x-ray is no guarantee. J Urgent Care Med 14:13–18
Martinez-Jimenez S, Pettavel PP (2018) Pathologic patterns of injury: diffuse alveolar damage. In: Martinez-Jimenez S, Rosado-de-Christenson ML, Carter BW (eds) Specialty imaging: HRCT of the lung (Second Edition). Elsevier Inc., pp 62–65
Kligerman SJ, Franks TJ, Galvin JR (2013) From the radiologic pathology archives: organization and fibrosis as a response to lung injury in diffuse alveolar damage, organizing pneumonia, and acute fibrinous and organizing pneumonia. Radiographics 33:1951–1975. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.337130057
Stephanie S, Shum T, Cleveland H et al (2020) Determinants of chest radiography sensitivity for COVID-19: a multi-institutional study in the United States. Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging 2:e200337. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryct.2020200337
Bernheim A, Mei X, Huang M, et al (2020) Chest CT findings in coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19): relationship to duration of infection. Radiology 200463https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200463
Ippolito D, Pecorelli A, Maino C et al (2020) Diagnostic impact of bedside chest X-ray features of 2019 novel coronavirus in the routine admission at the emergency department: case series from Lombardy region. Eur J Radiol 129:109092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109092
Pan F, Ye T, Sun P, et al (2020) Time course of lung changes on chest CT during recovery from 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia. Radiology 200370https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200370
Choi H, Qi X, Yoon SH et al (2020) Extension of coronavirus disease 2019 on chest CT and implications for chest radiographic interpretation. Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging 2:e200107. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryct.2020200107
Toussie D, Voutsinas N, Finkelstein M et al (2020) Clinical and chest radiography features determine patient outcomes in young and middle-aged adults with COVID-19. Radiology 297:E197–E206. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020201754
Rousan LA, Elobeid E, Karrar M, Khader Y (2020) Chest x-ray findings and temporal lung changes in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. BMC Pulm Med 20:245. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-020-01286-5
Borczuk AC, Salvatore SP, Seshan SV et al (2020) COVID-19 pulmonary pathology: a multi-institutional autopsy cohort from Italy and New York City. Mod Pathol 33:2156–2168. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41379-020-00661-1
Henkel M, Weikert T, Marston K et al (2020) Lethal COVID-19: radiologic-pathologic correlation of the lungs. Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging 2:e200406. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryct.2020200406
Vancheri SG, Savietto G, Ballati F et al (2020) Radiographic findings in 240 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia: time-dependence after the onset of symptoms. Eur Radiol 30:6161–6169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06967-7
Smith DL, Grenier J-P, Batte C, Spieler B (2020) A characteristic chest radiographic pattern in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging 2:e200280. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryct.2020200280
Han X, Fan Y, Alwalid O et al (2021) Six-month follow-up chest CT findings after severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Radiology 299:E177–E186. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2021203153
Wu X, Liu X, Zhou Y et al (2021) 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month respiratory outcomes in patients following COVID-19-related hospitalisation: a prospective study. Lancet Respir Med 9:747–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00174-0
Lodigiani C, Iapichino G, Carenzo L et al (2020) Venous and arterial thromboembolic complications in COVID-19 patients admitted to an academic hospital in Milan, Italy. Thromb Res 191:9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2020.04.024
Kwee TC, Kwee RM (2020) Chest CT in COVID-19: What the radiologist needs to know. Radiographics 40:1848–1865. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2020200159
Gosangi B, Rubinowitz AN, Irugu D et al (2022) COVID-19 ARDS: a review of imaging features and overview of mechanical ventilation and its complications. Emerg Radiol 29:23–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-021-01976-5
Revzin MV, Raza S, Warshawsky R et al (2020) Multisystem imaging manifestations of COVID-19, part 1: viral pathogenesis and pulmonary and vascular system complications. Radiographics 40:1574–1599. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2020200149
McGuinness G, Zhan C, Rosenberg N et al (2020) Increased incidence of barotrauma in patients with COVID-19 on invasive mechanical ventilation. Radiology 297:E252–E262. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020202352
Rodriguez-Nava G, Yanez-Bello MA, Trelles-Garcia DP, et al (2020) A retrospective study of coinfection of SARS-CoV-2 and Streptococcus pneumoniae in 11 hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia at a single center. Medical Science Monitor 26:. https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.928754
Søgaard KK, Baettig V, Osthoff M et al (2021) Community-acquired and hospital-acquired respiratory tract infection and bloodstream infection in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. J Intensive Care 9:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40560-021-00526-y
Vijayakumar B, Tonkin J, Devaraj A et al (2022) CT lung abnormalities after COVID-19 at 3 months and 1 year after hospital discharge. Radiology 303:444–454. https://doi.org/10.1148/RADIOL.2021211746
Zhao Y, Yang C, An X et al (2021) Follow-up study on COVID-19 survivors one year after discharge from hospital. Int J Infect Dis 112:173–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.09.017
Poerio A, Carlicchi E, Lotrecchiano L, et al (2022) Evolution of COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis–like residual changes over time — longitudinal chest CT up to 9 months after disease onset: a single-center case series. SN Compr Clin Med 4https://doi.org/10.1007/s42399-022-01140-1
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Flor, N., Fusco, S., Blazic, I. et al. Interpretation of chest radiography in patients with known or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection: what we learnt from comparison with computed tomography. Emerg Radiol 30, 363–376 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-022-02105-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-022-02105-6