RSNA and BSTI grading systems of COVID-19 pneumonia: comparison of the diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement

Kavak S., Duymus R.

BMC Medical Imaging, vol.21, no.1, 2021 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 21 Issue: 1
  • Publication Date: 2021
  • Doi Number: 10.1186/s12880-021-00668-3
  • Journal Name: BMC Medical Imaging
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Biotechnology Research Abstracts, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Keywords: Coronavirus, Computed tomography, RT-PCR, Guidelines of radiology, INDUCED LUNG-DISEASE, HIGH-RESOLUTION CT
  • Gazi University Affiliated: No


© 2021, The Author(s).Background: This study aimed to compare the performance and interobservers agreement of cases with findings on chest CT based on the British Society of Thoracic Imaging (BSTI) guideline statement of COVID-19 and the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) expert consensus statement. Methods: In this study, 903 patients who had admitted to the emergency department with a pre-diagnosis of COVID-19 between 1 and 18 July 2020 and had chest CT. Two radiologists classified the chest CT findings according to the RSNA and BSTI consensus statements. The performance, sensitivity and specificity values of the two classification systems were calculated and the agreement between the observers was compared by using kappa analysis. Results: Considering RT-PCR test result as a gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were significantly higher for the two observers according to the BSTI guidance statement and the RSNA expert consensus statement (83.3%, 89.7%, 89.0%; % 81.2,% 89.7,% 88.7, respectively). There was a good agreement in the PCR positive group (κ: 0.707; p < 0.001 for BSTI and κ: 0.716; p < 0.001 for RSNA), a good agreement in the PCR negative group (κ: 0.645; p < 0.001 for BSTI and κ: 0.743; p < 0.001 for RSNA) according to the BSTI and RSNA classification between the two radiologists. Conclusion: As a result, RSNA and BSTI statement provided reasonable performance and interobservers agreement in reporting CT findings of COVID-19. However, the number of patients defined as false negative and indeterminate in both classification systems is at a level that cannot be neglected.