ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Previous research revealed several biological and environmental factors modulating cognitive functioning over a human's lifespan. However, the relationships and interactions between biological factors (eg, genetic polymorphisms, immunological parameters, metabolic products, or infectious diseases) and environmental factors (eg, lifestyle, physical activity, nutrition, and work type or stress at work) as well as their impact on cognitive functions across the lifespan are still poorly understood with respect to their complexity. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the Dortmund Vital Study is to validate previous hypotheses as well as generate and validate new hypotheses about the relationships among aging, working conditions, genetic makeup, stress, metabolic functions, the cardiovascular system, the immune system, and mental performance over the human lifespan with a focus on healthy working adults. The Dortmund Vital Study is a multidisciplinary study involving the Departments of Ergonomics, Immunology, Psychology and Neurosciences, and Toxicology at the Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors at the Technical University of Dortmund (IfADo) in Germany, as well as several national and international partners. METHODS: The Dortmund Vital Study is designed as a combined cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Approximately 600 healthy subjects aged between 20 and 70 years will participate. A wide range of demographic, psychological, behavioral, sensory, cardiovascular, immunological, and biochemical data, a comprehensive electroencephalography (EEG)-based cognitive test battery as well as structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have been included in the study. RESULTS: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of IfADo in October 2015. The baseline testing was conducted between 2016 and 2021 and will be repeated every 5 years (3 follow-up measures until 2035). As of March 2020 (until the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic), 593 participants have been enrolled. Some results from the cross-sectional part of the study were already published, further results will be published soon. Longitudinal data will be analyzed and published by 2025. CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that the study will shed light on sources of interindividual differences in the alterations of cognitive functioning with increasing age and reveal biological and lifestyle markers contributing to work ability, longevity, and healthy aging on the one hand, and to risk factors for cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, or even dementia on the other hand. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05155397; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05155397. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/32352.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and hypercoagulability has been extensively described, and pulmonary embolism is a recognized complication of COVID-19. Currently, the need for computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) relies on the Wells score and serum D-dimer levels. However, because COVID-19 patients have a different thrombotic and inflammatory milieu, the usefulness of the Wells score deserves further exploration for this patient population. We aimed to explore the ability of the Wells score to predict pulmonary embolism in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this retrospective study, patients found to have a CTPA and a COVID-19 diagnosis during the same admission were selected for analysis. Age and sex, CTPA results, and associated D-dimer levels were entered in a database. The Wells score sensitivity and specificity were calculated at different values, and the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curve measured. RESULTS: Of 459 patients with COVID-19, 64 had a CTPA and 12 (19%) had evidence of pulmonary embolism. Previous or current evidence of deep vein thrombosis, a Wells score above 4 points, and serum D-dimer levels 5 times above age-adjusted upper normal values were associated with pulmonary embolism. However, only 33% of patients with pulmonary embolism had a Wells score of 4 points or higher. The area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic showed non-discriminating values (0.54) CONCLUSIONS: Although a Wells score of 4 or more points predicted pulmonary embolism in our cohort, the outcome can be present even with lower scores.