ABSTRACT
Background Post-COVID Sequelae are considered as the signs and symptoms that develop during or after an infection consistent with COVID-19 which continue for more than 12 weeks and are not explained by alternative diagnosis. The prevalence of post-COVID cardiac sequelae ranges from 2% to 71% across the globe and it is reported to be around 22% in India. With this background, the study was conducted to assess the prevalence of probable post-COVID cardiac sequelae (PCCS) and delay in health-seeking for post-COVID cardiac sequelae among healthcare workers. Methods A facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted among health workers and students in a medical educational institute in Karnataka from May 2022 to July 2022. Health workers and students who had a past history of COVID-19 during the COVID pandemic were included in the study. Socio-demographic details, clinical profile, symptoms of post-COVID cardiac sequelae, and health-seeking behavior were collected. Data were collected in Epicollect5 and analyzed using STATA statistical software. The prevalence of probable PCCS was expressed with 95% confidence interval. Univariate binomial logistic regression was done to assess the determinants of probable post-COVID sequelae. Results A total of 336 health workers were included in the study with a mean (SD) age of 25.6 (8.6) years. A majority (68.2%) of them were females and only 25 (7.4%) belonged to the age group of 45-60 years. The prevalence of probable post-COVID cardiac sequelae among health workers and medical students was 11.9% (95% CI: 8.76 - 15.7). Among the 40 participants who had probable post-COVID cardiac sequelae, 55% (95% CI: 40% - 70%) were not evaluated further which was their treatment-seeking behavior. Females, hypertensive individuals, and those who had moderate-severe disease during acute COVID-19 disease were at higher risk of developing probable post-COVID cardiac sequelae. Conclusion Around one out of ten individuals had experienced probable post-COVID cardiac sequelae, but only half of them got evaluated for it. An appropriate screening program for post-COVID cardiac sequelae needs to be implemented along with awareness-raising activities about long COVID to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with it.
ABSTRACT
(1) Background: Long COVID syndrome refers to long-term sequelae of the novel viral disease, which occur even in patients with initially mild disease courses. However, there is still little evidence of the actual organic consequences and their frequency, and there is no standardized workup to diagnose long COVID syndrome yet. In this study, we aim to determine the efficiency of a stepwise diagnostic approach for reconvalescent COVID-19 patients with cardiopulmonary symptoms. (2) Methods: The diagnostic workup for long COVID syndrome included three steps. In the first step, the focus was on broad applicability (e.g., blood tests and body plethysmography). In the second step, cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and cardiac MRI (CMR) were used. The third step was tailored to the individual needs of each patient. The observation period lasted from 22 February to 14 May 2021. (3) Results: We examined 231 patients in our long COVID unit (mean [SD] age, 47.8 [14.9], 132 [57.1%] women). Acute illness occurred a mean (SD) of 121 (77) days previously. Suspicious findings in the first visit were seen in 80 (34.6%) patients, prompting further diagnostics. Thirty-six patients were further examined with CPET and CMR. Of those, 16 (44.4%) had pathological findings. The rest had functional complaints without organ damage ("functional long COVID"). Cardiopulmonary sequelae were found in asymptomatic as well as severe courses of the initial COVID-19 disease. (4) Conclusions: A structured diagnostic pathway for the diagnosis of long COVID syndrome is practicable and rational in terms of resource allocation. With this approach, manifest organ damage can be accurately and comprehensively diagnosed and distinguished from functional complaints.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been implicated in a wide spectrum of cardiac manifestations following the acute phase of the disease. OBJECTIVES: To assess the range of cardiac sequelae after COVID-19 recovery. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Scopus (inception through 17 February 2021) and Google scholar (2019 through 17 February 2021). STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Prospective and retrospective studies, case reports and case series. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients assessed for cardiac manifestations after COVID-19 recovery. EXPOSURE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection diagnosed by PCR. METHODS: Systematic review. RESULTS: Thirty-five studies (fifteen prospective cohort, seven case reports, five cross-sectional, four case series, three retrospective cohort and one ambidirectional cohort) evaluating cardiac sequelae in 52 609 patients were included. Twenty-nine studies used objective cardiac assessments, mostly cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in 16 studies, echocardiography in 15, electrocardiography (ECG) in 16 and cardiac biomarkers in 18. Most studies had a fair risk of bias. The median time from diagnosis/recovery to cardiac assessment was 48 days (1-180 days). Common short-term cardiac abnormalities (<3 months) included increased T1 (proportion: 30%), T2 (16%), pericardial effusion (15%) and late gadolinium enhancement (11%) on CMR, with symptoms such as chest pain (25%) and dyspnoea (36%). In the medium term (3-6 months), common changes included reduced left ventricular global longitudinal strain (30%) and late gadolinium enhancement (10%) on CMR, diastolic dysfunction (40%) on echocardiography and elevated N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide (18%). In addition, COVID-19 survivors had higher risk (risk ratio 3; 95% CI 2.7-3.2) of developing heart failure, arrythmias and myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 appears to be associated with persistent/de novo cardiac injury after recovery, particularly subclinical myocardial injury in the earlier phase and diastolic dysfunction later. Larger well-designed and controlled studies with baseline assessments are needed to better measure the extent of cardiac injury and its clinical impact.