Skip to main content

Table 1 The CT findings of pediatric and adult patients infected with COVID-19

From: Chest CT findings of COVID-19-infected patients, are there differences between pediatric and adult patients? A systematic review

Author name

No. of cases (P:A)

Chest CT findings of patients

GGO

Consolidation

GGO and consolidation

Halo sign

Nodular opacities

Crazy paving

Lymphadenopathy

Pleural effusion

Unilateral involvement

Bilateral involvement

Central distribution

Peripheral distribution

Central and peripheral distribution

Normal radiology

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

P

A

Li et al. [17]

5 (5:0)

60

NA

0

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Xia et al. [18]

20 (20:0)

60

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

50

NA

15

NA

20

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

30

NA

50

NA

0

NA

100

NA

NA

NA

20

NA

Liu et al. [19]

59 (4:55)

25

80

50

42

NA

61

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

41

0

0

25

23

NA

25

NA

68

NA

1

NA

99

NA

NA

25

6

Xie et al. [11]

5 (0:5)

NA

60

NA

0

NA

40

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

100

NA

0

NA

100

NA

0

NA

NA

Yoon et al. [20]

9 (0:9)

NA

45

NA

5

NA

50

NA

NA

NA

10

NA

10

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

20

NA

60

NA

20

NA

NA

Xu et al. [21]

90 (0:90)

NA

72

NA

13

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

12

NA

1

NA

4

NA

NA

NA

59

NA

NA

NA

51

NA

NA

NA

23

Zhao et al. [22]

80 (0:80)

NA

71

NA

27.8

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1.3

NA

1.3

NA

5

NA

95

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Shi et al. [23]

81 (0:81)

NA

65

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

6

NA

10

NA

6

NA

5

NA

NA

NA

79

NA

NA

NA

54

NA

NA

NA

NA

Wang et al. [24]

114 (0:114)

NA

27.3

NA

27.3

NA

45.4

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

0.9

NA

NA

NA

85.4

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

2.6

Liu et al. [25]

137 (0:137)

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

84.7

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Wang et al. [26]

138 (0:138)

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

100

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Chung et al. [6]

21 (0:21)

NA

57

NA

0

NA

29

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

19

NA

0

NA

0

NA

10

NA

76

NA

NA

NA

33

NA

NA

NA

14

Yuan et al. [27]

27 (0:27)

NA

67

NA

19

NA

30

NA

NA

NA

7

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

4

NA

15

NA

85

NA

0

NA

26

NA

74

NA

0

Huang et al. [12]

41 (0:41)

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

98

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Song et al. [15]

51 (0:51)

NA

77

NA

55

NA

59

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

75

NA

6

NA

8

NA

14

NA

86

NA

10

NA

86

NA

2

NA

0

Totally

878 (29:849)

55.2 (3/16/29)

68.8 (10/367/533)

22.2 (2/2/9)

23.4 (9/107/457)

0 (1/0/5)

48.2 (8/136/282)

50 (1/10/20)

NA

15 (1/3/20)

5.8 (4/8/138)

20 (1/4/20)

27.7 (6/85/307)

0 (1/0/4)

2.4 (7/10/405)

4.2 (2/1/24)

3.5 (8/18/519)

30 (1/6/20)

11.7 (6/28/239)

50 (1/10/20)

82.1 (12/991/1207)

0 (1/0/20)

5.4 (5/8/147)

100 (1/20/20)

62.2 (8/211/339)

NA

25 (4/23/92)

20.8 (2/5/24)

6.7 (6/30/449)

  1. NA not applicable, GGO ground glass opacity, P pediatric, A adult
  2. All of numbers are percentages except for numbers in parenthesis in last row which are presentative of (studies engaged/cases positive for a specific finding/all of cases) respectively. In study [11], 100% of lesions was subpleural, which implies presence of peripheral distribution in 100% of cases. Also in this study, authors reported crazy paving as fine mesh shadow. In study [20], GGO prevalence (35%) was added to crazy paving prevalence (10%) because of same nature in crazy paving except for interlobular septal thickening which occurs in it (In this article, these two were reported separately.). This study was not considered in last row calculations because imaging findings were not per case, but per lesion. In study [19], 4 children and 55 adult patients (pregnant and non-pregnant) were enrolled. For adult age group, average of 3% reported in this article (for non-pregnant adults group, laboratory-confirmed pregnant women group, and clinically diagnosed pregnant women group) is presented (for decimal numbers, they were rounded down). In this article, GGO with reticulation was considered as crazy paving pattern. Regarding very small sample volume in pediatric age group, numbers in this study are affected by small sample size bias. In study [24], single or multiple lesions in one lung was reported to be 9.1% and 5.5% respectively, so 85.4% of cases had bilateral involvement