The paradox of pulmonary arterial hypertension in Italy in the COVID-19 era: is risk of disease progression around the corner?

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has led to significant restrictions on routine medical care. We conducted a multicentre nationwide survey of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) to determine the consequences of governance measures on PAH management and risk of poor outcome in patients with COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study, which included 25 Italian centres, considered demographic data, the number of in-person visits, 6-min walk and echocardiographic test results, brain natriuretic peptide/N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide test results, World Health Organization functional class assessment, presence of elective and non-elective hospitalisation, need for treatment escalation/initiation, newly diagnosed PAH, incidence of COVID-19 and mortality rates. Data were collected, double-checked and tracked by institutional records between March 1 and May 1, 2020, to coincide with the first peak of COVID-19 and compared with the same time period in 2019. RESULTS: Among 1922 PAH patients, the incidences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19 were 1.0% and 0.46%, respectively, with the latter comparable to that in the overall Italian population (0.34%) but associated with 100% mortality. Less systematic activities were converted into more effective remote interfacing between clinicians and PAH patients, resulting in lower rates of hospitalisation (1.2% versus 1.9%) and related death (0.3% versus 0.5%) compared with 2019 (p<0.001). A high level of attention is needed to avoid the potential risk of disease progression related to less aggressive escalation of treatment and the reduction in new PAH diagnoses compared with 2019. CONCLUSION: A cohesive partnership between healthcare providers and regional public health officials is needed to prioritise PAH patients for remote monitoring by dedicated tools.

Authors' response to the Letter to the Editor regarding: Post severe COVID-19 infection lung damages study. The experience of early three months multidisciplinary follow-up.

To the Editor, we thank Dr Ruggeri et al. for their interest in our previously published manuscript focused on lung damages after severe respiratory COVID-19 infection...

Post severe COVID-19 infection lung damages study. The experience of early three months multidisciplinary follow-up.

The correct type and time of follow-up for patients affected by COVID19 ARDS is still unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate at the survivors to COVID19 ARDS requiring non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) admitted to a Respiratory Intensive care unit (RICU) from March 8th till May 31th 2020 looking at all sequelae via a comprehensive follow up. All patients underwent a multi-disciplinary instrumental and clinical assessment within three months form admission to evaluate all infection related sequelae. Thirty-eight patients were enrolled Lung-Ultrasound (LUS) showed an outstanding discrimination ability (ROC AUC: 0.95) and a substantial agreement rate (Cohen's K: 0.74) compared to chest CT-scan detecting improvement of lung consolidations. Youden's test showed a cut-off pressure of 11 cmH2O ExpiratoryPAP-Continuous-PAP-max (EPAP-CPAP) applied at the airways during hospitalization to be significantly correlated (p value: 0.026) to the increased pulmonary artery common trunk diameter. A total of 8/38 patients (21.8%), 2 of whom during follow-up, were diagnosed with Pulmonary Emboli (PE) and started anticoagulant treatment. Patients with PE had a statistically significant shorter length of time of hospitalization, time to negative swab, CPAP/NIV duration, P/F ratio and D-dimers at follow-up compared to non PE. A comprehensive approach to patients with ARDS COVID19 requiring NRS is necessary. This study highlighted cardiopulmonary impairment related to the ARDS and to the high-EPAP-CPAP-max greater than 11mmHg provided during admission, the usefulness of LUS in monitoring post-infection recovery and the correct identification and  treatment of patients with PE during follow up.

Lung ultrasonography for long-term follow-up of COVID-19 survivors compared to chest CT scan.

BACKGROUND: While lung ultrasonography (LUS) has utility for the evaluation of the acute phase of COVID-19 related lung disease, its role in long-term follow-up of this condition has not been well described. The objective of this study is to compare LUS and chest computed tomography (CT) results in COVID-19 survivors with the intent of defining the utility of LUS for long-term follow-up of COVID-19 respiratory disease. METHODS: Prospective observational study that enrolled consecutive survivors of COVID-19 with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (HARF) admitted to the Respiratory Intensive Care Unit. Three months following hospital discharge, patients underwent LUS, chest CT, body plethysmography and laboratory testing, the comparison of which forms the basis of this report. RESULTS: 38 patients were enrolled, with a total of 190 lobes analysed: men 27/38 (71.1%), mean age 60.6 y (SD 10.4). LUS findings and pulmonary function tests outcomes were compared between patients with and without ILD, showing a statistically significant difference in terms of LUS score (p: 0.0002), FEV1 (p: 0.0039) and FVC (p: 0.012). ROC curve both in lobe by lobe and in patient's overall analysis revealed an outstanding ILD discrimination ability of LUS (AUC: 0.94 and 0.95 respectively) with a substantial Cohen's coefficient (K: 0.74 and 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: LUS has an outstanding discrimination ability compared to CT in identifying an ILD of at least mild grade in the post COVID-19 follow-up. LUS should be considered as the first-line tool in follow-up programs, while chest CT could be performed based on LUS findings.