Low rate of daily active tobacco smoking in patients with symptomatic COVID-19

Abstract Importance: As the pandemic of COVID-19 is still under progression, identification of prognostic factors remains a global challenge. The role of smoking has been suggested among the disease risk factors, although it is highly controversial. Objective: To evaluate whether the rate of daily smokers in patients with COVID-19 was different to that in the French population. Participants: COVID-19-infected in- and outpatients in a large French university hospital between February 28, 2020 and March 30, 2020 for outpatients and from March 23, till April 9, 2020 for inpatients. Design: We systematically interviewed the patients on their smoking status, use of e-cigarette and nicotinic substitutes. The rate of daily smokers in inpatients and outpatients were compared to those in the 2018 French general population, after standardization for sex and age. Results: The inpatient group was composed of 340 patients, median age 66 years: 203 men (59.7%, median age 66 years) and 137 women (40.3%, median age 66 years),with a rate of daily smokers of 4.1% CI95% [2.3 – 6.9] (5.4% of men and 2.2% of women). The outpatient group was composed of 139 patients, median age 44 years: 62 men (44.6%, median age 43 years, and 77 women (55.4 %, median age 44 years). The daily smokers' rate was 6.1 % CI95% [2.7 - 11.6] (5.1% of men and 6.8 % of women). In the French population, the daily smokers' rate was 25.4% (28.2% of men and 22.9% of women). The rate of daily smokers was significantly lower in COVID-19 patients, as compared to that in the French general population after standardization by age and sex, with Standardized Incidence Ratios of 0.23 [0.11 - 0.45] for outpatients and 0.23 [0.14 - 0.39] for inpatients. These ratios did not significantly differ between the two groups (P=0.94). Conclusions and relevance: This cross sectional study in both COVID-19 out- and inpatients shows that daily smokers rate in patients with symptomatic COVID-19 is lower as compared to the general population.

Low incidence of daily active tobacco smoking in patients with symptomatic COVID-19

Importance: As the pandemic of COVID-19 is still under progression, identification of prognostic factors remains a global challenge. The role of cigarette smoking has been suggested among the disease's epidemiological risk factors, although it is highly controversial. Objective: To evaluate the correlation of daily smoking with the susceptibility to develop SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants: We estimated the rates of daily current smokers in COVID-19-infected patients in a large French university hospital between February 28th , 2020 and March 30th , 2020 for outpatients and from March 23rd , till April 9th , 2020 for inpatients. Design: The rates from both groups were compared to those of daily current smokers in the 2018 French general population, established in 2018, after standardization of the data for sex and age. Results: The inpatient group was composed of 343 patients, median age 65 yr: 206 men (601%, median age 66 years) and 137 women (39.9%, median age 65 years) with a rate of daily smokers of 4.4% (5.4% of men and 2.9% of women).The outpatient group was composed of 139 patients, median age 44 years: 62 men (44.6 %, median age 43 years, and 77 women (55.4 %, median age 44 years). The daily smokers rate was 5.3% (5.1% of men and 5.5 % of women). In the French population, the daily smokers rate was 25.4% (28.2% of men and 22.9% of women). The rate of current daily smokers was significantly lower in COVID-19 outpatients and inpatients (80.3% and 75.4%, respectively), as compared to that in the French general population with standardized incidence ratios according to sex and age of 0.197 [0.094 - 0.41] and 0.246 [0.148 - 0.408]. These ratios did not significantly differ between the two groups (P=0.63). Conclusions and relevance: Our cross sectional study in both COVID-19 out- and inpatients strongly suggests that daily smokers have a very much lower probability of developing symptomatic or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection as compared to the general population.

Respiratory recovery trajectories after severe-to-critical COVID-19: a 1-year prospective multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of severe-to-critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may have functional impairment, radiological sequelae and persistent symptoms requiring prolonged follow-up. This pragmatic study aimed to describe their clinical follow-up and determine their respiratory recovery trajectories, and the factors that could influence them and their health-related quality of life. METHODS: Adults hospitalised for severe-to-critical COVID-19 were evaluated at 3 months and up to 12 months post-hospital discharge in this prospective, multicentre, cohort study. RESULTS: Among 485 enrolled participants, 293 (60%) were reassessed at 6 months and 163 (35%) at 12 months; 89 (51%) and 47 (27%) of the 173 participants initially managed with standard oxygen were reassessed at 6 and 12 months, respectively. At 3 months, 34%, 70% and 56% of the participants had a restrictive lung defect, impaired diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (D LCO) and significant radiological sequelae, respectively. During extended follow-up, both D LCO and forced vital capacity percentage predicted increased by means of +4 points at 6 months and +6 points at 12 months. Sex, body mass index, chronic respiratory disease, immunosuppression, pneumonia extent or corticosteroid use during acute COVID-19 and prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) were associated with D LCO at 3 months, but not its trajectory thereafter. Among 475 (98%) patients with at least one chest computed tomography scan during follow-up, 196 (41%) had significant sequelae on their last images. CONCLUSIONS: Although pulmonary function and radiological abnormalities improved up to 1 year post-acute COVID-19, high percentages of severe-to-critical disease survivors, including a notable proportion of those managed with standard oxygen, had significant lung sequelae and residual symptoms justifying prolonged follow-up.

Lower Rate of Daily Smokers With Symptomatic COVID-19: A Monocentric Self-Report of Smoking Habit Study.

Background: Identification of prognostic factors in COVID-19 remains a global challenge. The role of smoking is still controversial. Methods: PCR-positive in- and outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19 from a large French University hospital were systematically interviewed for their smoking status, use of e-cigarette, and nicotinic substitutes. The rates of daily smokers in in- and outpatients were compared using the same smoking habit questionnaire to those in the 2019 French general population, after standardisation for sex and age. Results: The inpatient group was composed of 340 patients, median age of 66 years: 203 men (59.7%) and 137 women (40.3%), median age of both 66 years, with a rate of 4.1% daily smokers (CI 95% [2.3-6.9]) (5.4% of men and 2.2% of women). The outpatient group was composed of 139 patients, median age of 44 years: 62 men (44.6%, median age of 43 years) and 77 women (55.4%, median age of 44 years). The daily smoker rate was 6.1% (CI 95% [2.7-11.6], 5.1% of men and 6.8% of women). Amongst inpatients, daily smokers represented 2.2 and 3.4% of the 45 dead patients and of the 29 patients transferred to ICU, respectively. The rate of daily smokers was significantly lower in patients with symptomatic COVID-19, as compared to that in the French general population after standardisation by age and sex, with standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) of 0.24 [0.12-0.48] for outpatients and 0.24 [0.14-0.40] for inpatients. Conclusions: Daily smoker rate in patients with symptomatic COVID-19 is lower as compared to the French general population.

Quality versus emergency: How good were ventilation fittings produced by additive manufacturing to address shortages during the COVID19 pandemic?

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease pandemic (COVID-19) increased the risk of shortage in intensive care devices, including fittings with intentional leaks. 3D-printing has been used worldwide to produce missing devices. Here we provide key elements towards better quality control of 3D-printed ventilation fittings in a context of sanitary crisis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Five 3D-printed designs were assessed for non-intentional (junctional and parietal) and intentional leaks: 4 fittings 3D-printed in-house using FDeposition Modelling (FDM), 1 FDM 3D-printed fitting provided by an independent maker, and 2 fittings 3D-printed in-house using Polyjet technology. Five industrial models were included as controls. Two values of wall thickness and the use of coating were tested for in-house FDM-printed devices. RESULTS: Industrial and Polyjet-printed fittings had no parietal and junctional leaks, and satisfactory intentional leaks. In-house FDM-printed fittings had constant parietal leaks without coating, but this post-treatment method was efficient in controlling parietal sealing, even in devices with thinner walls (0.7 mm vs 2.3 mm). Nevertheless, the use of coating systematically induced absent or insufficient intentional leaks. Junctional leaks were constant with FDM-printed fittings but could be controlled using rubber junctions rather than usual rigid junctions. The properties of Polyjet-printed and FDM-printed fittings were stable over a period of 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: 3D-printing is a valid technology to produce ventilation devices but requires care in the choice of printing methods, raw materials, and post-treatment procedures. Even in a context of sanitary crisis, devices produced outside hospitals should be used only after professional quality control, with precise data available on printing protocols. The mechanical properties of ventilation devices are crucial for efficient ventilation, avoiding rebreathing of CO2, and preventing the dispersion of viral particles that can contaminate health professionals. Specific norms are still required to formalise quality control procedures for ventilation fittings, with the rise of 3D-printing initiatives and the perspective of new pandemics.

Health-related quality of life of COVID-19 two and 12 months after intensive care unit admission.

PURPOSE: To describe health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and dyspnea of COVID-19, 2 and 12 months after an intensive care unit (ICU) stay. METHODS: Patients discharged from the ICU between April and June 2020 and subsequently transferred to an inpatient rehabilitation facility were assessed 2 months and 12 months after ICU admission. HRQoL was assessed by the EuroQoL EQ-5D-3L (visual analog scale and time trade-off normalized to the French population algorithm) and dyspnea was assessed by the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale. RESULTS: We enrolled 94 patients. Median EQ-5D-3L time trade-off was 0.80 (interquartile range, 0.36-0.91) at 2 months and 0.91 (0.52-1.00) at 12 months (P = 0.12). EQ-5D-3L visual analog scale was 70 (60-85) at 2 months and 70 (60-85) at 12 months (P = 0.07). The mMRC dyspnea scale was 3 (2-4) at ICU discharge, 1 (0-2), P < 0.001 at 2 months and 1 (1-2) at 12 months. At 12 months, 68 (76%) patients reported at least one symptom that was not present prior to ICU admission and 27 (61%) of the 44 patients who were previously working had returned to work. On multiple linear regression, factors associated with EQ-5D-3L were body mass index on ICU admission, tracheostomy, male gender and active smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Twelve months after ICU admission for COVID-19 and subsequent rehabilitation, a substantial proportion of patients reported alterations of HRQoL, dyspnea and symptoms that were not present prior to admission and a substantial proportion of these patients had not returned to work. Factors associated with a risk of poorer 12-month quality of life, may help to identify at-risk patients.

Lifting dyspnoea invisibility: COVID-19 face masks, the experience of breathing discomfort, and improved lung health perception - a French nationwide survey.

QUESTION ADDRESSED: In contrast with pain, dyspnoea is not visible to the general public, who lack the corresponding experiential baggage. We tested the hypothesis that the generalised use of face masks to fight severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 dissemination could change this and sensitise people to respiratory health. METHODS: General population polling (1012-person panel demographically representative of the adult French population, quota sampling method; 517 (51%) female). 860 (85%) answered "no" to "treated for a chronic respiratory disease" ("respiratory healthy"), and 152 answered "yes" ("respiratory disease"). 14% of respiratory healthy respondents reported having a close family member treated for a chronic respiratory disease (RH-family+ ). Respondents described mask-related attitudes, beliefs, inconveniencies, dyspnoea and changes in their respiratory health vision . RESULTS: Compliance with masks was high (94.7%). Dyspnoea ranked first among mask inconveniencies (respiratory disease 79.3%, respiratory healthy 67.3%; p=0.013). "Air hunger" was the main sensory dyspnoea descriptor. Mask-related dyspnoea was independently associated with belonging to RH-family+ (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.16-2.98) and removing masks to improve breathing (OR 5.21, 95% CI 3.73-7.28). It was negatively associated with considering masks effective to protect others (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.25-0.75). Half the respondents were more concerned with their respiratory health since wearing masks; 41% reported better understanding patients' experiences. ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: Wearing protective face masks leads to the mass discovery of breathing discomfort. It raises public awareness of what respiratory diseases involve and sensitivity to the importance of breathing. These data should be used as the fulcrum of respiratory health oriented communication actions.

Residual ground glass opacities three months after Covid-19 pneumonia correlate to alteration of respiratory function: The post Covid M3 study.

INTRODUCTION: Lung function in survivors of SARS-Co-V2 pneumonia is poorly known, but concern over the possibility of sequelae exists. METHODS: Retrospective study on survivors with confirmed infection and pneumonia on chest-CT. Correlations between PFT and residual radiologic anomalies at three months taking into account initial clinical and radiological severity and steroid use during acute phase. RESULTS: 137 patients (69 men, median age 59 (Q1 50; Q3 68), BMI 27.5 kg/m2 (25.1; 31.7)) were assessed. Only 32.9% had normal PFT, 75 had altered DLCO. Median (Q1; Q3) values were: VC 79 (66; 92) % pred, FEV1 81 (68; 89), TLC 78 (67; 85), DLCO 60 (44; 72), and KCO 89 (77; 105). Ground glass opacities (GGO) were present in 103 patients (75%), reticulations in 42 (30%), and fibrosis in 18 (13%). There were significantly lower FEV1 (p = 0.0089), FVC (p = 0.0010), TLC (p < 0.0001) and DLCO (p < 0.0001) for patients with GGO, lower TLC (p = 0.0913) and DLCO (p = 0.0181) between patients with reticulations and lower FVC (p = 0.0618), TLC (p = 0.0742) DLCO (p = 0.002) and KCO (p = 0.0114) between patients with fibrosis. Patients with initial ≥50% lung involvement had significantly lower FEV1 (p = 0.0019), FVC (p = 0.0033), TLC (p = 0.0028) and DLCO (p = 0.0003) compared to patients with ≤10%. There was no difference in PFT and residual CT lesions between patients who received steroids and those who did not. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients have altered PFT at three months, even in patients with mild initial disease, with significantly lower function in patients with residual CT lesions. Steroids do not seem to modify functional and radiological recovery. Long-term follow-up is needed.

Association of Clinical, Biological, and Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings With Electroencephalographic Findings for Patients With COVID-19.

Importance: There is evidence of central nervous system impairments associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, including encephalopathy. Multimodal monitoring of patients with COVID-19 may delineate the specific features of COVID-19-related encephalopathy and guide clinical management. Objectives: To investigate clinical, biological, and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings in association with electroencephalographic (EEG) features for patients with COVID-19, and to better refine the features of COVID-19-related encephalopathy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study conducted in Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, France, enrolled 78 hospitalized adults who received a diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov2) and underwent EEG between March 30 and June 11, 2020. Exposures: Detection of SARS-CoV-2 from a nasopharyngeal specimen using a reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction assay or, in the case of associated pneumonia, on a computed tomography scan of the chest. Main Outcomes and Measures: Data on the clinical and paraclinical features of the 78 patients with COVID-19 were retrieved from electronic patient records. Results: Of 644 patients who were hospitalized for COVID-19, 78 (57 men [73%]; mean [SD] age, 61 [12] years) underwent EEG. The main indications for EEG were delirium, seizure-like events, and delayed awakening in the intensive care unit after stopping treatment with sedatives. Sixty-nine patients showed pathologic EEG findings, including metabolic-toxic encephalopathy features, frontal abnormalities, periodic discharges, and epileptic activities. Of 57 patients who underwent brain MRI, 41 showed abnormalities, including perfusion abnormalities, acute ischemic lesions, multiple microhemorrhages, and white matter-enhancing lesions. Fifty-five patients showed biological abnormalities, including dysnatremia, kidney failure, and liver dysfunction, the same day as the EEG. The results of cerebrospinal fluid analysis were negative for SARS-Cov-2 for all tested patients. Nine patients who had no identifiable cause of brain injury outside COVID-19 were further isolated; their brain injury was defined as COVID-19-related encephalopathy. They represented 1% (9 of 644) of patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization. Six of these 9 patients had movement disorders, 7 had frontal syndrome, 4 had brainstem impairment, 4 had periodic EEG discharges, and 3 had MRI white matter-enhancing lesions. Conclusions and Relevance: The results from this cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 suggest there are clinical, EEG, and MRI patterns that could delineate specific COVID-19-related encephalopathy and guide treatment strategy.

Prevalence of hyposmia and hypogeusia in 390 COVID-19 hospitalized patients and outpatients: a cross-sectional study.

Anecdotal evidence rapidly accumulated during March 2020 from sites around the world that sudden hyposmia and hypogeusia are significant symptoms associated with the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Our objective was to describe the prevalence of hyposmia and hypogeusia and compare it in hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients to evaluate an association of these symptoms with disease severity. We performed a cross-sectional survey during 5 consecutive days in March 2020, within a tertiary referral center, associated outpatient clinic, and two primary care outpatient facilities in Paris. All SARS-CoV-2-positive patients hospitalized during the study period and able to be interviewed (n = 198), hospital outpatients seen during the previous month (n = 129), and all COVID-19-highly suspect patients in two primary health centers (n = 63) were included. Hospitalized patients were significantly more often male (64 vs 40%) and older (66 vs 43 years old in median) and had significantly more comorbidities than outpatients. Hyposmia and hypogeusia were reported by 33% of patients and occurred significantly less frequently in hospitalized patients (12% and 13%, respectively) than in the health centers' outpatients (33% and 43%, respectively) and in the hospital outpatients (65% and 60%, respectively). Hyposmia and hypogeusia appeared more frequently after other COVID-19 symptoms. Patients with hyposmia and/or hypogeusia were significantly younger and had significantly less respiratory severity criteria than patients without these symptoms. Olfactory and gustatory dysfunction occurs frequently in COVID-19, especially in young, non-severe patients. These symptoms might be a useful tool for initial diagnostic work-up in patients with suspected COVID-19.