Two-year diffusion capacity trajectory in COVID-19 pneumonia survivors.

Reduced diffusion capacity (DLCO) after COVID 19 pneumonia was reported in hospitalised patients after discharge. Here, we studied the restoration of DLCO over a 24 months period in COVID-19 pneumonia survivors (n = 317), who were categorised into "moderate" cases (no oxygen supply; no need for hospitalisation), "severe" cases (respiratory frequency > 30/min and/or peripheral oxygen SpO2 < 93%), and "critical" cases (respiratory failure and admission into the intensive care unit). COVID-19 pneumonia survivors with a decreased DLCO (<80%) at 3 months (n = 133) were invited for 6- and 24-months follow-up. At 3 months, impairment of DLCO was more severe in critical case (p < .01). Over time, the subgroups showed a similar level of improvement; and, there was no difference in recovery over time between the subgroups. At 24 months, the DLCO did not differ between the subgroups, with a mean DLCO of 73% for all patients. At 24 months, 65% of patients still had a DLCO < 80%, and in 40% of patients DLCO was <70% of predicted. Regardless the initial disease severity, all COVID-19 survivors showed improvement in DLCO during follow-up; however, DLCO had not normalised in the majority of patients with a DLCO <80% 3 months after hospital discharge.

Pulmonary function and Quality of Life in a prospective cohort of (non-) hospitalized COVID-19 pneumonia survivors up to six months.

OBJECTIVES: A decrease of both diffusion capacity (DLCO) and Quality of Life (QoL) was reported after discharge in hospitalized COVID-19 pneumonia survivors. We studied three and 6 month outcomes in hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients. METHODS: COVID-19 pneumonia survivors (n = 317) were categorized into non-hospitalized "moderate" cases (n = 59), hospitalized "severe" cases (n = 180) and ICU-admitted "critical" cases (n = 39). We studied DLCO and QoL (Short Form SF-36 health survey) 3 and 6 months after discharge. Data were analyzed using (repeated measures) ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis or Chi-square test (p < .05). RESULTS: At 3 months DLCO was decreased in 44% of moderate-, 56% of severe- and 82% of critical cases (p < .003). Mean DLCO in critical cases (64±14%) was lower compared to severe (76 ± 17%) and moderate (81±15%) cases (p < .001). A total of 159/278 patients had a decreased DLCO (<80%), of whom the DLCO improved after 6 months in 45% (71/159). However the DLCO did not normalize in the majority (89%) of the cases (63 ± 10% vs 68±10%; p < .001). At 3 months, compared to critical cases, moderate cases scored lower on SF-36 domain "general health" (p < .05); both moderate and severe cases scored lower on the domain of "health change" (p < .05). At 6 months, there were no differences in SF-36 between the subgroups. Compared to 3 months, in all groups "physical functioning" improved; in contrast all groups scored significantly lower on "non-physical" SF-36 domains. CONCLUSION: Three months after COVID-19 pneumonia, DLCO was still decreased in the more severely affected patients, with an incomplete recovery after 6 months. At 3 months QoL was impaired. At 6 months, while "physical functioning" improved, a decrease in "non-physical" QoL was observed but did not differ between the moderate and severely affected patients.

Reduced baroreflex sensitivity and increased splenic activity in patients with severe obstructive sleep apnea.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Experimental evidence suggests that this risk may be mediated by chronic sympathetic hyperactivation and systemic inflammation, but the precise mechanisms remain to be unraveled. Our aim was to evaluate whether severe OSA patients are characterized by increased sympathetic and hematopoietic activity, potentially driving atherosclerosis. METHODS: Untreated patients with severe OSA (apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) > 30 per hour) were matched with mild OSA patients (AHI<15 & >5 per hour) according to age, sex, and body mass index. Study objectives were to assess baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) and heart-rate variability (HRV) using continuous finger blood pressure measurements, hematopoietic activity in the bone marrow and spleen, and arterial inflammation with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT). RESULTS: A total of 34 subjects, 17 per group, were included in the analysis. Mean age was 60.7 ± 6.2 years, 24 (70.6%) were male. Mean AHI was 40.5 ± 12.6 per hour in the severe OSA group, and 10.5 ± 3.4 per hour in the mild OSA group. Participants with severe OSA were characterized by reduced BRS (5.7 [4.6-7.8] ms/mmHg in severe vs 8.2 [6.9-11.8] ms/mmHg in mild OSA, p = 0.033) and increased splenic activity (severe OSA 18F-FDG uptake 3.56 ± 0.77 vs mild OSA 3.01 ± 0.68; p = 0.036). HRV, bone marrow activity and arterial inflammation were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe OSA are characterized by decreased BRS and increased splenic activity. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to assess whether OSA treatment reduces sympathetic and splenic activity.

Chest computed tomography and alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient as rapid tools to diagnose and triage mildly symptomatic COVID-19 pneumonia patients.

BACKGROUND: In the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, rapid clinical triage is crucial to determine which patients need hospitalisation. We hypothesised that chest computed tomography (CT) and alveolar-arterial oxygen tension ratio (A-a) gradient may be useful to triage these patients, since they reflect the severity of the pneumonia-associated ventilation/perfusion abnormalities. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed in 235 consecutive patients suspected for COVID-19. The diagnostic protocol included low-dose chest CT and arterial blood gas analysis. In patients with CT-based COVID-19 pneumonia, the association between "need for hospitalisation" and A-a gradient was investigated by a multivariable logistic regression model. The A-a gradient was tested as a predictor for need for hospitalisation using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and a logistic regression model. RESULTS: 72 out of 235 patients (mean±sd age 55.5±14.6 years, 40% female) screened by chest CT showed evidence for COVID-19 pneumonia. In these patients, A-a gradient was shown to be a predictor of need for hospitalisation, with an optimal decision level (cut-off) of 36.4 mmHg (95% CI 0.70-0.91, p<0.001). The A-a gradient was shown to be independently associated with need for hospitalisation (OR 1.97 (95% CI 1.23-3.15), p=0.005; A-a gradient per 10 points) from CT severity score (OR 1.13 (95% CI 0.94-1.36), p=0.191), National Early Warning Score (OR 1.19 (95% CI 0.91-1.57), p=0.321) or peripheral oxygen saturation (OR 0.88 (95% CI 0.68-1.14), p=0.345). CONCLUSION: Low-dose chest CT and the A-a gradient may serve as rapid and accurate tools to diagnose COVID-19 pneumonia and to select mildly symptomatic patients in need for hospitalisation.

The SARS-CoV-2 viral load in COVID-19 patients is lower on face mask filters than on nasopharyngeal swabs.

Face masks and personal respirators are used to curb the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory droplets; filters embedded in some personal protective equipment could be used as a non-invasive sample source for applications, including at-home testing, but information is needed about whether filters are suited to capture viral particles for SARS-CoV-2 detection. In this study, we generated inactivated virus-laden aerosols of 0.3-2 microns in diameter (0.9 µm mean diameter by mass) and dispersed the aerosolized viral particles onto electrostatic face mask filters. The limit of detection for inactivated coronaviruses SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV-NL63 extracted from filters was between 10 to 100 copies/filter for both viruses. Testing for SARS-CoV-2, using face mask filters and nasopharyngeal swabs collected from hospitalized COVID-19-patients, showed that filter samples offered reduced sensitivity (8.5% compared to nasopharyngeal swabs). The low concordance of SARS-CoV-2 detection between filters and nasopharyngeal swabs indicated that number of viral particles collected on the face mask filter was below the limit of detection for all patients but those with the highest viral loads. This indicated face masks are unsuitable to replace diagnostic nasopharyngeal swabs in COVID-19 diagnosis. The ability to detect nucleic acids on face mask filters may, however, find other uses worth future investigation.

Parental Opinions about the Expansion of the Neonatal Screening Programme.

BACKGROUND: Advances in genomics will open up opportunities in the fields of genetic testing, early diagnosis and disease treatment. While neonatal screening is the field of application par excellencefor these developments, the debate on its potential benefits and drawbacks is mainly theoretically driven and based on the opinions of professionals. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study of the perceptions, preferences and needs of parents (and parents to be) with respect to expansion of the neonatal screening programme. Seven focus group discussions were conducted. Using disease scenarios, 4 examples of conditions amenable to neonatal screening were discussed in depth. All focus group discussions were audio taped and content analysed. RESULTS: Participants thought that the medical benefits of screening were very important for the child. Assuming the availability of effective early medical treatment, almost 100% would be willing to participate in a screening programme. If such treatment were absent, their potential willingness would be much lower. CONCLUSIONS: The divergence in attitudes and preferences we found in this study reflected the complexity inherent in any consideration of screening for additional conditions. To implement such options successfully and to direct applied research in genomics, it is important to develop a better understanding of the thinking of target groups, namely parents.

Information and informed consent for neonatal screening: opinions and preferences of parents.

BACKGROUND: The current neonatal screening program ("the heel prick") involves taking a few drops of blood from almost every newborn in the Netherlands to determine whether the child is suffering from one of three congenital disorders: phenylketonuria, congenital hypothyroid, or adrenogenital syndrome. This study investigated the preferences and views of parents and future parents with respect to information about, and consent to, neonatal screening and the possible expansion of the program. METHODS: Seven focus group discussions took place with future parents, parents with a healthy child, and parents with children affected by disorders for which screening is possible, now or in the future (total of 36 participants). The discussions were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed for content. RESULTS: Parents were not well informed about what the heel prick involves at present. Nevertheless, they see it as a routine procedure and do not think about the possibility of refusing it. If the heel-prick program were to be expanded, parents would like to be informed earlier, preferably during pregnancy. In addition, most parents preferred an opt-out consent approach. CONCLUSIONS: If the neonatal screening program is to be expanded, parents would prefer for information about the program be given during pregnancy. In addition, they preferred an opt-out consent approach, on condition that screening was for the purpose of preventing irreversible harm. Parental opinion was divided on this issue if the aim of screening were to be widened.