Impact of impaired pulmonary function on clinical outcomes in survivors of severe COVID-19 without pre-existing respiratory disease

Le résumé fourni par la source

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of impaired pulmonary function on patient-centered outcomes after hospital discharge due to severe COVID-19 in patients without preexisting respiratory disease. METHODS: This is an ongoing prospective cohort study evaluating patients (> 18 years of age) 2-6 months after hospital discharge due to severe COVID-19. Respiratory symptoms, health-related quality of life, lung function, and the six-minute walk test were assessed. A restrictive ventilatory defect was defined as TLC below the lower limit of normal, as assessed by plethysmography. Chest CT scans performed during hospitalization were scored for the presence and extent of parenchymal abnormalities. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 17.2 ± 5.9 weeks after the diagnosis of COVID-19, 120 patients were assessed. Of those, 23 (19.2%) reported preexisting chronic respiratory diseases and presented with worse lung function and exertional dyspnea at the follow-up visit in comparison with their counterparts. When we excluded the 23 patients with preexisting respiratory disease plus another 2 patients without lung volume measurements, a restrictive ventilatory defect was observed in 42/95 patients (44%). This subgroup of patients (52.4% of whom were male; mean age, 53.9 ± 11.3 years) showed reduced resting gas exchange efficiency (DLCO), increased daily-life dyspnea, increased exertional dyspnea and oxygen desaturation, and reduced health-related quality of life in comparison with those without reduced TLC (50.9% of whom were male; mean age, 58.4 ± 11.3 years). Intensive care need and higher chest CT scores were associated with a subsequent restrictive ventilatory defect. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a restrictive ventilatory defect approximately 4 months after severe COVID-19 in patients without prior respiratory comorbidities implies worse clinical outcomes.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.