CHEST RADIOLOGY / ORIGINAL PAPER
The role of AI assistance in the evaluation of unenhanced chest CT scans in an emergency setting
More details
Hide details
1
Department of Radiology, Hospital of Bolzano (SABES-ASDAA), Teaching Hospital of Paracelsus Medical University (PMU), Bolzano, Italy
2
Department of Radiology, University of Cagliari, Monserrato (CA), Italy
These authors had equal contribution to this work
Submission date: 2025-09-23
Final revision date: 2025-10-20
Acceptance date: 2025-11-21
Publication date: 2026-03-13
Corresponding author
Riccardo Valletta
Department of Radiology, Hospital of Bolzano (SABES-ASDAA), Teaching Hospital of Paracelsus Medical University (PMU), 5 Böhler St., 39100 Bolzano, Italy
Pol J Radiol, 2026; 91(1): 132-139
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Purpose:
To evaluate the potential role of artificial intelligence (AI)-based software in assisting radiologists with reporting unenhanced chest computed tomography (CCT) scans in an emergency setting.
Material and methods:
It was an IRB-approved retrospective study, and the need for informed consent was waived. We included 90 unenhanced CCT scans performed in an emergency setting over a 2-month period (November-December 2024). Anonymized original reports were retrieved. Axial 3 mm thick multiplanar reconstructions were processed using commercially AI-based software (xAid Chest, xAID LLC, Barcelona, Spain). All scans were subsequently re-evaluated by two radiologists in consensus (reference standard). Detection of lung nodules, lung opacifications, emphysema, coronary calcification, aortic dilatation, pulmonary dilatation, pleural effusion, pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, rib fractures, vertebral fractures, and adrenal masses was compared between original reports, AI outputs, and image revision.
Results:
In the original reports, the frequency of reported findings ranged from 96.7% (pleural effusion) to 5.6% (pulmonary artery dilatation); among the described findings, the positivity rate ranged from 100% (emphysema) to 11.4% (pericardial effusion). The AI software demonstrated non-inferior sensitivity and specificity compared to the reporting radiologist in terms of sensitivity in all pathologies, excluding emphysema. For several findings that are not routinely reported by radiologists (coronary calcifications, pulmonary dilatation, vertebral fractures), the AI system outperformed the radiologist in sensitivity, albeit with a trade-off in specificity.
Conclusions:
AI is a valuable tool for assisting radiologists in reporting unenhanced CCT scans in an emergency setting.
REFERENCES (32)
1.
Pinto A, Reginelli A, Pinto F, Lo Re G, Midiri F, Muzj C, et al. Errors in imaging patients in the emergency setting. Br J Radiol 2016; 89: 20150914. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20150914.
2.
Platon A, Becker M, Perneger T, Varnay G, Breguet R, Becker CD, Poletti PA. Emergency computed tomography: what is missed at first reading? J Comput Assist Tomogr 2016; 40: 177-182.
3.
Patra A, Premkumar M, Keshava SN, Chandramohan A, Joseph E, Gibikote S. Radiology reporting errors: learning from report addenda. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2021; 31: 333-344.
4.
Safari S, Dizaji SR, Yousefifard M, Taheri MS, Sharifi A. Prevalence and clinical significance of incidental findings in chest and abdominopelvic CT scans of trauma patients: a cross-sectional study. Am J Emerg Med 2024; 82: 117-124.
5.
Thompson RJ, Wojcik SM, Grant WD, Ko PY. Incidental findings on CT scans in the emergency department. Emerg Med Int 2011; 2011: 624847. DOI: 10.1155/2011/624847.
6.
Evans CS, Arthur R, Kane M, Omofoye F, Chung AE, Moreton E, Moore C. Incidental radiology findings on computed tomography studies in emergency department patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Emerg Med 2022; 80: 243-256.
7.
Lai WA, Liu PH, Tsai MJ, Huang YC. Frequency, recognition, and potential risk factors of incidental findings on trauma computed tomography scans: a cross-sectional study at an urban level one trauma center. J Acute Med 2020; 10: 106-114.
8.
Scholtz JE, Lu MT, Hedgire S, Meyersohn NM, Oliveira GR, Prabhakar AM, et al. Incidental pulmonary nodules in emergent coronary CT angiography for suspected acute coronary syndrome: impact of revised 2017 Fleischner Society guidelines. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2018; 12: 28-33.
9.
Teng LE, Kennedy L, Lok SC, O’Rourke E, Premaratne M. An opportunity to seize from low hanging fruits: capitalising on incidentally reported coronary artery calcification. Heart Lung Circ 2023; 32: 1222-1229.
10.
Malik RF, Sun KJ, Azadi JR, Lau BD, Whelton S, Arbab-Zadeh A, et al. Opportunistic screening for coronary artery disease: an untapped population health resource. J Am Coll Radiol 2024, 21: 880-889.
11.
Graham C, Baranwal A, Kietselaer B, Ayoub C, Larsen C, Langer K, et al. Coronary artery calcification as a predictor of survival in patients receiving post-transplant cyclophosphamide for GVHD prophylaxis. Transplant Cell Ther 2025; S2666-6367(25)01102-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtct.2025.03.014.
12.
Hwang EJ, Goo JM, Park CM. AI applications for thoracic imaging: considerations for best practice. Radiology 2025; 314: e240650. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.240650.
13.
Yacoub B, Varga-Szemes A, Schoepf UJ, Kabakus IM, Baruah D, Burt JR, et al. Impact of artificial intelligence assistance on chest CT interpretation times: a prospective randomized study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2022; 219: 743-751.
14.
Huo Y, Yang Y, Halloran ME, Longini IM, Dean NE. Hypothesis testing and sample size considerations for the test-negative design. Res Sq 2023; rs.3.rs-3783493. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3783493/v1.
15.
Thuere KL, Mantz L, Sultana S, Henderson LM, Sakoda LC, Kazerooni E, et al. Opportunistic screening on chest CT, from the AJR special series on screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2025. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.25.33069.
16.
Tatar OC, Akay MA, Metin S. DraiNet: AI-driven decision support in pneumothorax and pleural effusion management. Pediatr Surg Int 2023; 40: 30. DOI: 10.1007/s00383-023-05609-5.
17.
Hamelink II, de Heide EEJ, Pelgrimn GJGJ, Kwee TCT, van Ooijen PMAP, de Bock GHT, Vliegenthart RR. Validation of an AI-based algorithm for measurement of the thoracic aortic diameter in low-dose chest CT. Eur J Radiol 2023; 167: 111067. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.111067.
18.
Hamelink I, van Tuinen M, Kwee TC, van Ooijen PMA, Vliegenthart R. Repeatability of AI-based, automatic measurement of vertebral and cardiovascular imaging biomarkers in low-dose chest CT: the ImaLife cohort. Eur Radiol 2025; 35: 3833-3841.
19.
Graby J, Harris M, Jones C, Waring H, Lyen S, Hudson BJ, Rodrigues JCL. Assessing the role of an artificial intelligence assessment tool for thoracic aorta diameter on routine chest CT. Br J Radiol 2023; 96: 20220853. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20220853.
20.
Kauhanen PS, Liimatainen T, Korhonen M, Parkkonen J, Vienonen J, Vanninen R, Hedman M. Pulmonary artery dilatation is a common finding in a coronary artery CT angiography population. In Vivo 2021, 35: 2177-2185.
21.
Lange TJ, Dornia C, Stiefel J, Stroszczynski C, Arzt M, Pfeifer M, Hamer OW. Increased pulmonary artery diameter on chest computed tomography can predict borderline pulmonary hypertension. Pulm Circ 2013, 3: 363-368.
22.
Terpenning S, Deng M, Hong-Zohlman SN, Lin CT, Kligerman SJ, Jeudy J, Ketai LH. CT measurement of central pulmonary arteries to diagnose pulmonary hypertension (PHTN): more reliable than valid? Clin Imaging 2016, 40: 821-827.
23.
Xu J, Liu J, Guo N, Chen L, Song W, Guo D, et al. Performance of artificial intelligence-based coronary artery calcium scoring in non-gated chest CT. Eur J Radiol 2021; 145: 110034. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110034.
24.
Zhou Q, Qin P, Luo J, Hu Q, Sun W, Chen B, Wang G. Evaluating AI rib fracture detections using follow-up CT scans. Am J Emerg Med 2023; 72: 34-38.
25.
Spångeus A, Bjerner T, Lindblom M, Götz C, Hummer A, Salzlechner C, Woisetschläger M. Breaking the silence: AI’s contribution to detecting vertebral fractures in opportunistic CT scans in the elderly – a validation study. Arch Osteoporos 2025; 20: 42. DOI: 10.1007/s11657-025-01524-5.
26.
Collins CE, Giammanco PA, Trivedi SM, Sarsour RO, Kricfalusi M, Elsissy JG. Diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for detection of rib fracture on X-ray and computed tomography imaging: a systematic review. J Imaging Inform Med 2025; 38: 2973-2982.
27.
Kaike L, Castro-Zunti R, Ko SB, Jin GY. Diagnosis of rib fracture using artificial intelligence on chest CT images of patients with chest trauma. J Korean Soc Radiol 2024; 85: 769-779.
28.
Spångeus A, Bjerner T, Lindblom M, Götz C, Hummer A, Salzlechner C, Woisetschläger M. Breaking the silence: AI’s contribution to detecting vertebral fractures in opportunistic CT scans in the elderly-a validation study. Arch Osteoporos 2025; 20: 42.
29.
Yin K, Chen W, Qin G, Liang J, Bao X, Yu H, et al. Performance assessment of an artificial intelligence-based coronary artery calcium scoring algorithm in non-gated chest CT scans of different slice thickness. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2024; 14: 5708-5720.
30.
Abadia AF, Yacoub B, Stringer N, Snoddy M, Kocher M, Schoepf UJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and performance of artificial intelligence in detecting lung nodules in patients with complex lung disease: a noninferiority study. J Thorac Imaging 2022; 37: 154-161.
31.
Geppert J, Asgharzadeh A, Brown A, Stinton C, Helm EJ, Jayakody S, et al. Software using artificial intelligence for nodule and cancer detection in CT lung cancer screening: systematic review of test accuracy studies. Thorax 2024; 79: 1040-1049.
32.
Sourlos N, Pelgrim G, Wisselink HJ, Yang X, de Jonge G, Rook M, et al. Effect of emphysema on AI software and human reader performance in lung nodule detection from low-dose chest CT. Eur Radiol Exp 2024; 8: 63. DOI: 10.1186/s41747-024-00459-9.