A serious epidemic of COVID-19 broke out in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, and spread to other Chinese cities and several countries now. As the majority of patients infected with COVID-19 had chest CT abnormality, chest CT has become an important tool for early diagnosis of COVID-19 and monitoring disease progression. There is growing evidence that children are also susceptible to COVID-19 and have atypical presentations compared with adults. This review is mainly about the differences in clinical symptom spectrum, diagnosis of COVID-19, and CT imaging findings between adults and children, while highlighting the value of radiology in prevention and control of COVID-19 in pediatric patients. Key points • Compared with adults, pediatric patients with COVID-19 have the characteristics of lower incidence, slighter clinical symptoms, shorter course of disease, and fewer severe cases. • The chest CT characteristics of COVID-19 in pediatric patients were atypical, with more localized GGO extent, lower GGO attenuation, and relatively rare interlobular septal thickening. • Chest CT should be used with more caution in pediatric patients with COVID-19 to protect this vulnerable population from risking radiation.

The overall diagnostic accuracy of copeptin, galectin-3, hs-cTnT, MR-proANP, and ST2 was relatively good. MR-proADM had a poor capacity to confirm or exclude HF. Improving the diagnostic accuracy of HF by a combination of biomarkers could be considered in the future.

Purpose To compare the diagnostic accuracy of dual-phase 99mTc-MIBI single photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) and 4D CT for the localization of hyperfunctioning parathyroid glands, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Whether 4D CT combined to SPECT/CT [contrast-enhanced (CE)-SPECT/CT] had a better diagnostic performance than SPECT/CT alone in this scenario was also evaluated. Material and methods PubMed and Embase databases were searched for eligible studies. To reduce interstudy heterogeneity, only studies with clear head-to-head comparison were included. Publication bias was assessed by the Deeks funnel plot. The pooled sensitivity, specificity and the area under the curve (AUC) for 4D CT, SPECT/CT and CE-SPECT/CT were determined by random-effect analysis, respectively. Results Nine studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 911 participants. The sensitivity and specificity of 4D CT were 0.85 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.69–0.94] and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.88–0.96), whereas the sensitivity and specificity for SPECT/CT were 0.68 (95% CI, 0.51–0.82; P = 0.048 compared with 4D CT) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.95–0.99; P = 0.014 compared with 4D CT), respectively. CE-SPECT/CT is comparable to SPECT/CT in specificity and AUC, but it may improve the sensitivity (although there was a lack of statistical difference, 0.87 vs. 0.78; P = 0.125). Conclusion Although 4D CT shows comparable AUC and borderline better sensitivity than SPECT/CT, its clinical application is confined by relatively low specificity and high radiation exposure. CE-SPECT/CT may improve the sensitivity without compromising the specificity and AUC of SPECT/CT.

No abstract

No abstract