ABSTRACT
The current gold-standard treatment for COVID-19-related hypoxemic respiratory failure is invasive mechanical ventilation. However, do not intubate orders (DNI), prevent the use of this treatment in some cases. The aim of this study was to evaluate if non-invasive ventilatory supports can provide a good therapeutic alternative to invasive ventilation in patients with severe COVID-19 infection and a DNI. Data were collected from four centres in three European countries. Patients with severe COVID-19 infection were included. We emulated a hypothetical target trial in which outcomes were compared in patients with a DNI order treated exclusively by non-invasive respiratory support with patients who could be intubated if necessary. We set up a propensity score and an inverse probability of treatment weighting to remove confounding by indication. Four-hundred patients were included: 270 were eligible for intubation and 130 had a DNI order. The adjusted risk ratio for death among patients eligible for intubation was 0.81 (95% CI 0.46 to 1.42). The median length of stay in acute care for survivors was similar between groups (18 (10-31) vs. (19 (13-23.5); p = 0.76). The use of non-invasive respiratory support is a good compromise for patients with severe COVID-19 and a do not intubate order.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this pilot study was to assess physical fitness and its relationship with functional dyspnea in survivors of COVID-19 6 months after their discharge from the hospital. METHODS: Data collected routinely from people referred for cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) following hospitalization for COVID-19 were retrospectively analyzed. Persistent dyspnea was assessed using the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale. RESULTS: Twenty-three people with persistent symptoms were referred for CPET. Mean modified Medical Research Council dyspnea score was 1 (SD = 1) and was significantly associated with peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak; %) (rho = -0.49). At 6 months, those hospitalized in the general ward had a relatively preserved VO2peak (87% [SD = 20]), whereas those who had been in the intensive care unit had a moderately reduced VO2peak (77% [SD = 15]). Of note, the results of the CPET revealed that, in all individuals, respiratory equivalents were high, power-to-weight ratios were low, and those who had been in the intensive care unit had a relatively low ventilatory efficiency (mean VE/VCO2 slope = 34 [SD = 5]). Analysis of each individual showed that none had a breathing reserve <15% or 11 L/min, all had a normal exercise electrocardiogram, and 4 had a heart rate >90%. CONCLUSION: At 6 months, persistent dyspnea was associated with reduced physical fitness. This study offers initial insights into the mid-term physical fitness of people who required hospitalization for COVID-19. It also provides novel pathophysiological clues about the underlaying mechanism of the physical limitations associated with persistent dyspnea. Those with persistent dyspnea should be offered a tailored rehabilitation intervention, which should probably include muscle reconditioning, breathing retraining, and perhaps respiratory muscle training. IMPACT: This study is the first, to our knowledge, to show that a persistent breathing disorder (in addition to muscle deconditioning) can explain persistent symptoms 6 months after hospitalization for COVID-19 infection and suggests that a specific rehabilitation intervention is warranted.