CT Halo sign: A systematic review.
Clicks: 289
ID: 90466
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
289 views
39 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #14 of 26 articles by views in European journal of radiology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The CT Halo sign or Halo sign (HS) refers to ground-glass opacity surrounding a nodule or mass in the lung parenchyma. We conducted a systematic review to find the etiological associations of HS. We also evaluated the diagnostic performances of HS for invasive fungal infections (IFI) in immunosuppressed patients.The systematic review was conducted as per PRISMA guidelines. We searched the PubMed and EMBASE database till June 2018 without any restrictions. Only case reports, case series and original articles published in English language were included. A database created from the electronic searches was compiled and subsequent analysis was done. [PROSPERO registration: CRD42018094739] RESULTS: 168 studies were eligible, which included 51 case reports, 15 prospective studies, 102 retrospective studies. A total of 1977 patients (out of 6371) with HS were identified with age range between <1year-94years. The most common diagnosis in the immunosuppressed, mixed, immunocompetent and not specified groups were IFI (86.9 %, n = 1194), Cryptococcosis (51.6 %, n = 124), Cryptococcosis (40 %, n = 20) and lung neoplasms (81.8 %, n = 36) respectively. 14 studies (11 retrospective, 3 prospective) were included in quantitative analysis. The pooled sensitivity(sn), specificity(sp) and odd's ratio (OR) of HS for diagnosing IFI were 50.4 %, 91 % and 6.61 respectively. Also, HS could not reliably differentiate IPA from mucormycosis in the pooled analysis.HS can be seen in a large number of diverse conditions both in immunosuppressed and immunocompetent population. In immunosuppressed patients HS is specific for IFI but cannot rule it out. Additionally, it cannot reliably distinguish between IPA and mucormycosis.
Abstract Quality Issue:
This abstract appears to be incomplete or contains metadata (127 words).
Try re-searching for a better abstract.
| Reference Key |
ray2020cteuropean
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Ray, Animesh;Mittal, Ankit;Vyas, Surabhi; |
| Journal | European journal of radiology |
| Year | 2020 |
| DOI |
S0720-048X(20)30032-2
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.