RESUMEN
For patients with pneumonia and COVID19 repeating chest radiography is recommend in current British Thoracic Society (BTS) guidelines. Over two distinct time periods during the COVID19 pandemic (Aug-Dec 2020, Jun-Aug 2021) we undertook an audit of 829 patients hospitalised with infective radiological change (pneumonia=481, COVID19=348). 654/829 patients (79%) required radiological follow-up under BTS guideline criteria. 414/654 (63%) were planned, 322/654 (49%) occurred and, of patients receiving radiological follow-up, most occurred within BTS timelines (86%). Further audits should be conducted to ensure BTS guidelines adherence, to avoid delay in diagnosing underlying malignancy or chronic lung disease.
RESUMEN
BackgroundCOVID-19 causes a wide spectrum of disease. The incidence and severity of sequelae after the acute infection is uncertain. Data measuring the longer-term impact of COVID-19 on symptoms, radiology and pulmonary function are urgently needed to plan follow-up services. MethodsConsecutive patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were prospectively recruited to this observational study with outcomes recorded at 28-days. All were invited to a systematic follow up at 8-12 weeks, including chest radiograph, spirometry, exercise test, bloods, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaires. FindingsBetween 30th March and 3rd June 2020, 163 patients with COVID-19 were recruited. Median hospital length of stay was 5 days (IQR 2-8) and 19 patients died. At 8-12 weeks post admission, 134 patients were available for follow up and 110 attended. Most (74%) had persistent symptoms (notably breathlessness and excessive fatigue) with reduced HRQoL. Only patients who required oxygen therapy in hospital had abnormal radiology, clinical examination or spirometry at follow up. Thirteen (12%) patients had an abnormal chest X-ray with improvement in all but 2 from admission. Eleven (10%) had restrictive spirometry. Blood test abnormalities had returned to baseline in the majority (104/110). InterpretationPatients with COVID-19 remain highly symptomatic at 8-12 weeks, however, clinical abnormalities requiring action are infrequent, especially in those without a supplementary oxygen requirement during their acute illness. This has significant implications for physicians assessing patients with persistent symptoms, suggesting that a more holistic approach focussing on rehabilitation and general wellbeing is paramount. FundingSouthmead Hospital Charity
RESUMEN
RationaleThe impact of COVID-19 on patients with Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) has not been established. ObjectivesTo assess outcomes following COVID-19 in patients with ILD versus those without in a contemporaneous age, sex and comorbidity matched population. MethodsAn international multicentre audit of patients with a prior diagnosis of ILD admitted to hospital with COVID-19 between 1 March and 1 May 2020 was undertaken and compared with patients, without ILD obtained from the ISARIC 4C cohort, admitted with COVID-19 over the same period. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary analysis distinguished IPF from non-IPF ILD and used lung function to determine the greatest risks of death. Measurements and Main ResultsData from 349 patients with ILD across Europe were included, of whom 161 were admitted to hospital with laboratory or clinical evidence of COVID-19 and eligible for propensity-score matching. Overall mortality was 49% (79/161) in patients with ILD with COVID-19. After matching ILD patients with COVID-19 had higher mortality (HR 1.60, Confidence Intervals 1.17-2.18 p=0.003) compared with age, sex and comorbidity matched controls without ILD. Patients with a Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) of <80% had an increased risk of death versus patients with FVC [≥]80% (HR 1.72, 1.05-2.83). Furthermore, obese patients with ILD had an elevated risk of death (HR 1.98, 1.13-3.46). ConclusionsPatients with ILD are at increased risk of death from COVID-19, particularly those with poor lung function and obesity. Stringent precautions should be taken to avoid COVID-19 in patients with ILD.
RESUMEN
IntroductionCOVID-19 has an unpredictable clinical course so prognostic biomarkers would be invaluable when triaging patients on admission to hospital. Many biomarkers have been suggested using large observational datasets but sample timing is crucial to ensure prognostic relevance. The DISCOVER study prospectively recruited patients with COVID-19 admitted to a UK hospital and analysed a panel of putative prognostic biomarkers on the admission blood sample to identify markers of poor outcome. MethodsConsecutive patients admitted to hospital with proven or clinicoradiological suspected COVID-19 were recruited. Admission bloods were extracted from the clinical laboratory. A panel of biomarkers (IL-6, suPAR, KL-6, Troponin, Ferritin, LDH, BNP, Procalcitonin) were performed in addition to routinely performed markers (CRP, neutrophils, lymphocytes, neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio). Age, NEWS score and CURB-65 were included as comparators. All biomarkers were tested in logistic regression against a composite outcome of non-invasive ventilation, intensive care admission, or death, with Area Under the Curve (AUC) figures calculated. Results155 patients had 28-day outcomes at the time of analysis. CRP (AUC 0.51, CI:0.40-0.62), lymphocyte count (AUC 0.62, CI:0.51-0.72), and other routine markers did not predict the primary outcome. IL-6 (AUC: 0.78,0.65-0.89) and suPAR (AUC 0.77, CI: 0.66-0.85) showed some promise, but simple clinical features alone such as NEWS score (AUC: 0.74, 0.64-0.83) or age (AUC: 0.70, 0.61-0.78) performed nearly as well. DiscussionAdmission blood biomarkers have only moderate predictive value for predicting COVID-19 outcomes, while simple clinical features such as age and NEWS score outperform many biomarkers. IL-6 and suPAR had the best performance, and further studies should validate these biomarkers in a prospective fashion.
