The Diagnostic Performance and Utility of Chest XR in Relation to Chest CT in Nontraumatic Respiratory Emergency Patients

Abstract

This study aimed to determine the diagnostic performance and utility of chest radiography in relation to chest computed tomography (CT) in nontraumatic respiratory emergency patients.Patients presenting to the emergency department with respiratory complaints due to nontraumatic pathologies and who had consecutive chest XR and chest CT assessments with an interval of fewer than 6 hours were enrolled in the study (n = 561).The two methods were determined to be consistent with moderate agreement in detecting pleural effusion (κ = 0.576, P < 0.001), pneumothorax (κ = 0.567, P < 0.001), increased cardiothoracic ratio (κ =0.472, P < 0.001), and pneumonic consolidation (κ = 0.465, P < 0.001). The consistency rate was significantly higher in patients aged <40 years (95.5% in ≤30 years and 90.9% in 31-40 years) as compared to older patients (81.8%, 68.2%, and 72.7% in 41-60 years, 61-80 years, and >80 years, respectively; P < 0.001 for each). The consistency rate was also higher for posteroanterior (PA) chest XR views than for anteroposterior (AP) chest XR views (72.7% vs. 68.2%, P = 0.005) and for high- and moderate-quality chest XR views than for poor-quality views (72.7% and 77.3% vs. 70.5%, P = 0.001).The consistency between the chest XR and CT was more likely in patients aged <40 years and for PA and moderate-to-high quality chest XR views, as compared to older patients and AP and poor-quality views, respectively. We suggest that an upright position PA chest X-ray with high imaging quality may be the first choice, especially in patients aged <40 years admitted to the emergency department with respiratory symptoms.