Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis on Thin-Section Chest CT Scans: Diagnostic Performance of the ATS/JRS/ALAT versus ACCP Imaging Guidelines

Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of the American Thoracic Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Asociación Latinoamericana del Tórax (ATS/JRS/ALAT) versus the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) imaging classifications for hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP). Materials and Methods Patients in the institutional review board-approved Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) registry referred for multidisciplinary discussion (MDD) at the authors' institution (January 1, 2006-April 1, 2021) were included in this retrospective study when ILD was diagnosed at MDD. MDD diagnoses included HP, connective tissue disease-ILD, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Retrospective review of thin-section CT images was performed in consensus by two cardiothoracic radiologists blinded to the diagnosis. Diagnostic patterns were determined for thin-section CT images using both classifications. Discordance rates were determined. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were assessed using MDD diagnosis as the reference standard. Results A total of 297 patients were included in the study: 200 (67%) with HP, 49 (16%) with connective tissue disease-ILD, and 48 (16%) with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis at MDD. The discordance rate between the two classifications was 21%. Assuming low HP prevalence (10%), ATS/JRS/ALAT classification outperformed ACCP classification, with greater accuracy (92.3% vs 87.6%) and greater positive predictive value (60.7% vs 42.9%). Assuming high prevalence (50%), accuracy and negative predictive value were superior using ACCP classification (81.7% vs 79.7% and 77.7% vs 72.6%, respectively), and positive predictive value was superior using ATS/JRS/ALAT classification (93.3% vs 87.1%). Conclusion Accuracy of the ATS/JRS/ALAT and ACCP HP classifications was greater in settings with low and high HP prevalence, respectively. Diagnostic performance of both classifications was discordant in a minority of cases.