Effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation in COVID-19 respiratory failure patients post-ICU.

INTRODUCTION: Some COVID-19 patients develop respiratory failure requiring admission to intensive care unit (ICU). We aim to evaluate the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) post-ICU in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Twenty-one COVID-19 patients were evaluated pre- and post-PR and compared retrospectively to a non-COVID-19 group of 21 patients rehabilitated after ICU admission due to respiratory failure. RESULTS: PR induced greater 6-min walking distance improvement in COVID-19 patients (+205 ± 121 m) than in other respiratory failure patients post-ICU (+93 ± 66 m). The sooner PR was performed post-ICU, the better patients recovered. CONCLUSIONS: PR induced large functional improvements in COVID-19 patients post-ICU although significant physical and psychosocial impairments remained post-PR.

[COLIBRI: Improving clinical practice and producing relevant scientific data]. / COLIBRI : optimiser la pratique clinique et produire des données scientifiques pertinentes.

COLIBRI-COPD is a francophone consultation web portal accessible to pulmonologists in the hospital and in the community. We present this observation which describes the phenotype of COPD patients entered (anthropometry, exposures, addictions, functional impairments, questionnaires: MRC, DIRECT, CAT, HAD, Epworth, co-morbidities, incidence of exacerbations, drug treatment or other treatments). The results of the first 1079 patients show a high level of completeness for the main data items. A comparison of patients seen in outpatient consultations shows significant variability between patients with the same GOLD stage, regarding the incidence of exacerbations, signs of anxiety-depression, of diabetes mellitus, or the prescriptions of anticholinergics and inhaled corticosteroids. These initial results suggest that data collection in real life gives a reliable database to obtain longitudinal data on various aspects of COPD. The data quality (completeness, reliability) is partly related to the usability of the web tool and to the possibility of doing self-assessment of practitioners' own recorded data.

Protected specimen brush in the assessment of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Selection of a certain lung segment for bronchoscopic sampling is unnecessary.

The protected specimen brush (PSB) with quantitative cultures is one of the most reliable techniques for assessing pneumonia in mechanically ventilated (MV) patients. The need to select a certain lung segment for bronchoscopic sampling is still debated. We investigated whether the results of PSB specimens collected within an area radiographically involved with pneumonia (inv-PSB) differed from the results of PSB specimens collected within a lung area without radiographic abnormalities (non-inv-PSB) in 39 MV patients with suspected pneumonia. The comparison of bacterial titers of inv-PSB and non-inv-PSB cultures did not disclose significant differences. Agreement regarding the diagnosis of pneumonia according to recommended diagnostic threshold was observed in 34 of 39 patients (87.1 percent). These results which are in accordance with the pathophysiology of ventilator-associated pneumonia and histologic studies do not support the need to select a certain lung segment for bronchoscopic sampling in most MV patients with suspected pneumonia.

Diagnosis of pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients. Repeatability of the protected specimen brush.

The repeatability (i.e., the variation in repeated measurements of the same quantity) of the protected specimen brush (PSB) with quantitative cultures was assessed in 22 consecutive mechanically ventilated (MV) patients with suspected nosocomial pneumonia. Five PSB samples were collected in the same lung area during the same bronchoscopic procedure and processed for bacteriologic identification and quantitative culture. A laboratory control was also performed in order to assess the in vitro repeatability of the quantitative culture technique. The five PSB always recovered the same microorganisms, indicating a 100% qualitative repeatability for the PSB. Conversely, the quantitative repeatability was somewhat lower since in 59% of the patients the quantitative results varied by more than one log10, which is the minimal precision affordable with quantitative cultures. The distinction between presence or absence of infection based on the 10(3) cfu/ml recommended diagnostic threshold was, however, only moderately affected by the variability of the quantitative results since only three of 22 patients (13.6%) displayed results spread out on each side of the 10(3) cfu/ml break point. Intrasubject variability of quantitative results was not explained by problems with the quantitative culture technique, which proved excellent repeatability in the laboratory. This study indicated that, although the PSB technique with quantitative cultures displays an acceptable level of repeatability, caution is advisable when interpreting PSB results in critically ill patients with suspected pneumonia, especially if one refers to the 10(3) cfu/ml recommended diagnostic threshold and if a decision to treat or to abstain from treating is to be made.