Lung Aeration in COVID-19 Pneumonia by Ultrasonography and Computed Tomography.

We conducted a prospective single-center observational study to determine lung ultrasound reliability in assessing global lung aeration in 38 hospitalized patients with non-critical COVID-19. On admission, fixed chest CT scans using visual (CTv) and software-based (CTs) analyses along with lung ultrasound imaging protocols and scoring systems were applied. The primary endpoint was the correlation between global chest CTs score and global lung ultrasound score. The secondary endpoint was the association between radiographic features and clinical disease classification or laboratory indices of inflammation. Bland-Altman analysis between chest CT scores obtained visually (CTv) or using software (CTs) indicated that only 1 of the 38 paired measures was outside the 95% limits of agreement (-4 to +4 score). Global lung ultrasound score was highly and positively correlated with global software-based CTs score (r = 0.74, CI = 0.55-0.86; p < 0.0001). Significantly higher median CTs score (p = 0.01) and lung ultrasound score (p = 0.02) were found in severe compared to moderate COVID-19. Furthermore, we identified significantly lower (p < 0.05) lung ultrasound and CTs scores in those patients with a more severe clinical condition manifested by SpO2 < 92% and C-reactive protein > 58 mg/L. We concluded that lung ultrasound is a reliable bedside clinical tool to assess global lung aeration in hospitalized non-critical care patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Prospective longitudinal evaluation of hospitalised COVID-19 survivors 3 and 12 months after discharge.

Background: Long-term outcome data of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors are needed to understand their recovery trajectory and additional care needs. Methods: A prospective observational multicentre cohort study was carried out of adults hospitalised with COVID-19 from March through May 2020. Workup at 3 and 12 months following admission consisted of clinical review, pulmonary function testing, 6-min walk distance (6MWD), muscle strength, chest computed tomography (CT) and quality of life questionnaires. We evaluated factors correlating with recovery by linear mixed effects modelling. Results: Of 695 patients admitted, 299 and 226 returned at 3 and 12 months, respectively (median age 59 years, 69% male, 31% severe disease). About half and a third of the patients reported fatigue, dyspnoea and/or cognitive impairment at 3 and 12 months, respectively. Reduced 6MWD and quadriceps strength were present in 20% and 60% at 3 months versus 7% and 30% at 12 months. A high anxiety score and body mass index correlated with poor functional recovery. At 3 months, diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (D LCO) and total lung capacity were below the lower limit of normal in 35% and 18%, decreasing to 21% and 16% at 12 months; predictors of poor D LCO recovery were female sex, pre-existing lung disease, smoking and disease severity. Chest CT improved over time; 10% presented non-progressive fibrotic changes at 1 year. Conclusion: Many COVID-19 survivors, especially those with severe disease, experienced limitations at 3 months. At 1 year, the majority showed improvement to almost complete recovery. To identify additional care or rehabilitation needs, we recommend a timely multidisciplinary follow-up visit following COVID-19 admission.

Prospective longitudinal evaluation of hospitalised COVID-19 survivors 3 and 12 months after discharge

Background Long-term outcome data of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors are needed to understand their recovery trajectory and additional care needs. Methods A prospective observational multicentre cohort study was carried out of adults hospitalised with COVID-19 from March through May 2020. Workup at 3 and 12 months following admission consisted of clinical review, pulmonary function testing, 6-min walk distance (6MWD), muscle strength, chest computed tomography (CT) and quality of life questionnaires. We evaluated factors correlating with recovery by linear mixed effects modelling. Results Of 695 patients admitted, 299 and 226 returned at 3 and 12 months, respectively (median age 59 years, 69% male, 31% severe disease). About half and a third of the patients reported fatigue, dyspnoea and/or cognitive impairment at 3 and 12 months, respectively. Reduced 6MWD and quadriceps strength were present in 20% and 60% at 3 months versus 7% and 30% at 12 months. A high anxiety score and body mass index correlated with poor functional recovery. At 3 months, diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) and total lung capacity were below the lower limit of normal in 35% and 18%, decreasing to 21% and 16% at 12 months;predictors of poor DLCO recovery were female sex, pre-existing lung disease, smoking and disease severity. Chest CT improved over time;10% presented non-progressive fibrotic changes at 1 year. Conclusion Many COVID-19 survivors, especially those with severe disease, experienced limitations at 3 months. At 1 year, the majority showed improvement to almost complete recovery. To identify additional care or rehabilitation needs, we recommend a timely multidisciplinary follow-up visit following COVID-19 admission. Most hospitalised #COVID19 survivors show promising recovery 1 year after discharge, although mild symptoms may linger. Severe impairments are rare, but this study suggests an evaluation of the individual care needs after discharge.https://bit.ly/3sZK45x