6-month consequences of COVID-19 in patients discharged from hospital: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The long-term health consequences of COVID-19 remain largely unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the long-term health consequences of patients with COVID-19 who have been discharged from hospital and investigate the associated risk factors, in particular disease severity. METHODS: We did an ambidirectional cohort study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 who had been discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital (Wuhan, China) between Jan 7 and May 29, 2020. Patients who died before follow-up; patients for whom follow-up would be difficult because of psychotic disorders, dementia, or readmission to hospital; those who were unable to move freely due to concomitant osteoarthropathy or immobile before or after discharge due to diseases such as stroke or pulmonary embolism; those who declined to participate; those who could not be contacted; and those living outside of Wuhan or in nursing or welfare homes were all excluded. All patients were interviewed with a series of questionnaires for evaluation of symptoms and health-related quality of life, underwent physical examinations and a 6-min walking test, and received blood tests. A stratified sampling procedure was used to sample patients according to their highest seven-category scale during their hospital stay as 3, 4, and 5-6, to receive pulmonary function test, high resolution CT of the chest, and ultrasonography. Enrolled patients who had participated in the Lopinavir Trial for Suppression of SARS-CoV-2 in China received SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests. Multivariable adjusted linear or logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between disease severity and long-term health consequences. FINDINGS: In total, 1733 of 2469 discharged patients with COVID-19 were enrolled after 736 were excluded. Patients had a median age of 57·0 years (IQR 47·0-65·0) and 897 (52%) were male and 836 (48%) were female. The follow-up study was done from June 16 to Sept 3, 2020, and the median follow-up time after symptom onset was 186·0 days (175·0-199·0). Fatigue or muscle weakness (52%, 855 of 1654) and sleep difficulties (26%, 437 of 1655) were the most common symptoms. Anxiety or depression was reported among 23% (367 of 1616) of patients. The proportions of 6-min walking distance less than the lower limit of the normal range were 17% for those at severity scale 3, 13% for severity scale 4, and 28% for severity scale 5-6. The corresponding proportions of patients with diffusion impairment were 22% for severity scale 3, 29% for scale 4, and 56% for scale 5-6, and median CT scores were 3·0 (IQR 2·0-5·0) for severity scale 3, 4·0 (3·0-5·0) for scale 4, and 5·0 (4·0-6·0) for scale 5-6. After multivariable adjustment, patients showed an odds ratio (OR) of 1·61 (95% CI 0·80-3·25) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 4·60 (1·85-11·48) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for diffusion impairment; OR 0·88 (0·66-1·17) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and OR 1·76 (1·05-2·96) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for anxiety or depression, and OR 0·87 (0·68-1·11) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 2·75 (1·61-4·69) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for fatigue or muscle weakness. Of 94 patients with blood antibodies tested at follow-up, the seropositivity (96·2% vs 58·5%) and median titres (19·0 vs 10·0) of the neutralising antibodies were significantly lower compared with at the acute phase. 107 of 822 participants without acute kidney injury and with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 or more at acute phase had eGFR less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 at follow-up. INTERPRETATION: At 6 months after acute infection, COVID-19 survivors were mainly troubled with fatigue or muscle weakness, sleep difficulties, and anxiety or depression. Patients who were more severely ill during their hospital stay had more severe impaired pulmonary diffusion capacities and abnormal chest imaging manifestations, and are the main target population for intervention of long-term recovery. FUNDING: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, National Key Research and Development Program of China, Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, and Peking Union Medical College Foundation.

Comparison of clinical characteristics between COVID-19 and H7N9 fatal cases: An observational study.

Objective: The outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020 is reminiscent of the H7N9 outbreak in 2013, which poses a huge threat to human health. We aim to compare clinical features and survival factors in fatal cases of COVID-19 and H7N9. Methods: Data on confirmed COVID-19 and H7N9 fatal cases identified in mainland China were analyzed to compare demographic characteristics and clinical severity. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests and a restricted mean survival time model. A Cox regression model was used to identify survival factors in fatal cases of COVID-19 and H7N9. Results: Similar demographic characteristics were observed in fatal cases of COVID-19 and H7N9. The proportion of fatal cases of H7N9 receiving antibiotics, antiviral drugs, and oxygen treatment was higher than that of COVID-19. The potential protective factors for fatal COVID-19 cases were receiving antibiotics (HR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.22-0.61), oxygen treatment (HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.44-0.99), and corticosteroids (HR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35-0.62). In contrast, antiviral drugs (HR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.08-0.56) and corticosteroids (HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.29-0.69) were the protective factors for H7N9 fatal cases. Conclusion: The proportion of males, those having one or more underlying medical condition, and older age was high in COVID-19 and H7N9 fatal cases. Offering antibiotics, oxygen treatment, and corticosteroids to COVID-19 cases extended the survival time. Continued global surveillance remains an essential component of pandemic preparedness.

Comparison of clinical characteristics between COVID-19 and H7N9 fatal cases: An observational study

Objective The outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020 is reminiscent of the H7N9 outbreak in 2013, which poses a huge threat to human health. We aim to compare clinical features and survival factors in fatal cases of COVID-19 and H7N9. Methods Data on confirmed COVID-19 and H7N9 fatal cases identified in mainland China were analyzed to compare demographic characteristics and clinical severity. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using log-rank tests and a restricted mean survival time model. A Cox regression model was used to identify survival factors in fatal cases of COVID-19 and H7N9. Results Similar demographic characteristics were observed in fatal cases of COVID-19 and H7N9. The proportion of fatal cases of H7N9 receiving antibiotics, antiviral drugs, and oxygen treatment was higher than that of COVID-19. The potential protective factors for fatal COVID-19 cases were receiving antibiotics (HR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.22–0.61), oxygen treatment (HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.44–0.99), and corticosteroids (HR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35–0.62). In contrast, antiviral drugs (HR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.08–0.56) and corticosteroids (HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.29–0.69) were the protective factors for H7N9 fatal cases. Conclusion The proportion of males, those having one or more underlying medical condition, and older age was high in COVID-19 and H7N9 fatal cases. Offering antibiotics, oxygen treatment, and corticosteroids to COVID-19 cases extended the survival time. Continued global surveillance remains an essential component of pandemic preparedness.

6-month consequences of COVID-19 in patients discharged from hospital: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The long-term health consequences of COVID-19 remain largely unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the long-term health consequences of patients with COVID-19 who have been discharged from hospital and investigate the associated risk factors, in particular disease severity. METHODS: We did an ambidirectional cohort study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 who had been discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital (Wuhan, China) between Jan 7, 2020, and May 29, 2020. Patients who died before follow-up, patients for whom follow-up would be difficult because of psychotic disorders, dementia, or re-admission to hospital, those who were unable to move freely due to concomitant osteoarthropathy or immobile before or after discharge due to diseases such as stroke or pulmonary embolism, those who declined to participate, those who could not be contacted, and those living outside of Wuhan or in nursing or welfare homes were all excluded. All patients were interviewed with a series of questionnaires for evaluation of symptoms and health-related quality of life, underwent physical examinations and a 6-min walking test, and received blood tests. A stratified sampling procedure was used to sample patients according to their highest seven-category scale during their hospital stay as 3, 4, and 5-6, to receive pulmonary function test, high resolution CT of the chest, and ultrasonography. Enrolled patients who had participated in the Lopinavir Trial for Suppression of SARS-CoV-2 in China received severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody tests. Multivariable adjusted linear or logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between disease severity and long-term health consequences. FINDINGS: In total, 1733 of 2469 discharged patients with COVID-19 were enrolled after 736 were excluded. Patients had a median age of 57·0 (IQR 47·0-65·0) years and 897 (52%) were men. The follow-up study was done from June 16, to Sept 3, 2020, and the median follow-up time after symptom onset was 186·0 (175·0-199·0) days. Fatigue or muscle weakness (63%, 1038 of 1655) and sleep difficulties (26%, 437 of 1655) were the most common symptoms. Anxiety or depression was reported among 23% (367 of 1617) of patients. The proportions of median 6-min walking distance less than the lower limit of the normal range were 24% for those at severity scale 3, 22% for severity scale 4, and 29% for severity scale 5-6. The corresponding proportions of patients with diffusion impairment were 22% for severity scale 3, 29% for scale 4, and 56% for scale 5-6, and median CT scores were 3·0 (IQR 2·0-5·0) for severity scale 3, 4·0 (3·0-5·0) for scale 4, and 5·0 (4·0-6·0) for scale 5-6. After multivariable adjustment, patients showed an odds ratio (OR) 1·61 (95% CI 0·80-3·25) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 4·60 (1·85-11·48) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for diffusion impairment; OR 0·88 (0·66-1·17) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and OR 1·77 (1·05-2·97) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for anxiety or depression, and OR 0·74 (0·58-0·96) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 2·69 (1·46-4·96) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for fatigue or muscle weakness. Of 94 patients with blood antibodies tested at follow-up, the seropositivity (96·2% vs 58·5%) and median titres (19·0 vs 10·0) of the neutralising antibodies were significantly lower compared with at the acute phase. 107 of 822 participants without acute kidney injury and with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 or more at acute phase had eGFR less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 at follow-up. INTERPRETATION: At 6 months after acute infection, COVID-19 survivors were mainly troubled with fatigue or muscle weakness, sleep difficulties, and anxiety or depression. Patients who were more severely ill during their hospital stay had more severe impaired pulmonary diffusion capacities and abnormal chest imaging manifestations, and are the main target population for intervention of long-term recovery. FUNDING: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, National Key Research and Development Program of China, Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, and Peking Union Medical College Foundation.

Efficacy and safety assessment of severe COVID-19 patients with Chinese medicine: A retrospective case series study at early stage of the COVID-19 epidemic in Wuhan, China.

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has formed a global pandemic since late 2019. Benefitting from the application experience of Chinese Medicine (CM) for influenza and SARS, CM has been used to save patients at the early stage of COVID-19 outbreak in China. AIM OF THE STUDY: In order to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CM, and compare with Western Medicine (WM) for COVID-19, we conducted a retrospective case series study based on the patients in Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital, Wuhan, China. METHODS: The inclusion and exclusion criteria of data extraction were set for this retrospective study. All patients who were admitted by the Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital between January 17th and February 25th 2020 were considered. In addition, patients enrolled met the severe defined by the guidelines released by the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China. In these cases included in the study, CM or WM treatment was selected according to the wishes of the patients at the beginning of hospitalization. The patients in CM group were treated with Huashi Baidu granule (137 g po, bid) combined with the injections of Xiyanping (100 mg iv, bid), Xuebijing (100 ml iv, bid) and Shenmai (60 ml iv, qd) according to the syndrome of epidemic toxin blocking the lung in the theory of Traditional Chinese Medicine. The WM group received antiviral therapy (including abidor capsule 0.2 g po, tid; Lopinavir-Ritonavir tablets, 500 mg po, bid), antibiotics (such as cefoperazone 2 g iv, bid; moxifloxacin hydrochloride tablets, 0.4 g po, qd) or corticosteroid therapy (such as methylprednisolone succinate sodium 40 mg iv, qd; prednisone, 30 mg po, qd). In addition, patients in both groups received routine supportive treatment, including oxygen inhalation, symptomatic therapy, and/or human intravenous immunoglobulin, and/or serum albumin, and treatment for underlying diseases. The clinical outcomes were evaluated based on changes related with clinical manifestations, computer tomography (CT) scan images, and laboratory examinations before and after the treatment. RESULTS: 55 severe COVID-19 patients, with 23 in CM group and 32 in WM group, were included for analyzed. There was no case of death, being transferred to ICU, or receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in two groups during hospitalization. The median time of SARS-CoV-2 RNA clearance in CM and WM group were 12 days and 15.5 days respectively, the ratio of nucleic acid negative conversion of CM group at different follow-up time points was significantly higher than that of WM group (HR: 2.281, P = 0.018). Further, the chest CT imaging showed more widely lung lesion opacity absorbed in the CM group. The high sensitivity C-reactive protein and serum ferritin decreased significantly in the CM group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in adverse events in terms of liver function and renal function between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Based on this retrospective analysis from Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital, CM has better effects in SARS-CoV-2 RNA clearance, promoting lung lesion opacity absorbed and reducing inflammation in severe COVID-19 patients, which is effective and safe therapy for treating severe COVID-19 and reducing mortality.

Effects of the Lower Airway Secretions on Airway Opening Pressures and Suction Pressures in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Computational Simulation.

In patients with critically ill COVID-19 pneumonia, lower airways are filled with plenty of highly viscous exudates or mucus, leading to airway occlusion. The estimation of airway opening pressures and effective mucus clearance are therefore two issues that clinicians are most concerned about during mechanical ventilation. In this study we retrospectively analyzed respiratory data from 24 critically ill patients with COVID-19 who received invasive mechanical ventilation and recruitment maneuver at Jinyintan Hospital in Wuhan, China. Among 24 patients, the mean inspiratory plateau pressure was 52.4 ± 4.4 cmH2O (mean ± [SD]). Particularly, the capnograms presented an upward slope during the expiratory plateau, indicting the existence of airway obstruction. A computational model of airway opening was subsequently introduced to investigate possible fluid dynamic mechanisms for the extraordinarily high inspiratory plateau pressures among these patients. Our simulation results showed that the predicted airway opening pressures could be as high as 40-50 cmH2O and the suction pressure could exceed 20 kPa as the surface tension and viscosity of secretion simulants markedly increased, likely causing the closures of the distal airways. We concluded that, in some critically ill patients with COVID-19, limiting plateau pressure to 30 cmH2O may not guarantee the opening of airways due to the presence of highly viscous lower airway secretions, not to mention spontaneous inspiratory efforts. Active airway humidification and effective expectorant drugs are therefore strongly recommended during airway management.

Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Since December, 2019, Wuhan, China, has experienced an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 have been reported but risk factors for mortality and a detailed clinical course of illness, including viral shedding, have not been well described. METHODS: In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study, we included all adult inpatients (≥18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from Jinyintan Hospital and Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital (Wuhan, China) who had been discharged or had died by Jan 31, 2020. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and laboratory data, including serial samples for viral RNA detection, were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between survivors and non-survivors. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression methods to explore the risk factors associated with in-hospital death. FINDINGS: 191 patients (135 from Jinyintan Hospital and 56 from Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital) were included in this study, of whom 137 were discharged and 54 died in hospital. 91 (48%) patients had a comorbidity, with hypertension being the most common (58 [30%] patients), followed by diabetes (36 [19%] patients) and coronary heart disease (15 [8%] patients). Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital death associated with older age (odds ratio 1·10, 95% CI 1·03-1·17, per year increase; p=0·0043), higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (5·65, 2·61-12·23; p<0·0001), and d-dimer greater than 1 µg/mL (18·42, 2·64-128·55; p=0·0033) on admission. Median duration of viral shedding was 20·0 days (IQR 17·0-24·0) in survivors, but SARS-CoV-2 was detectable until death in non-survivors. The longest observed duration of viral shedding in survivors was 37 days. INTERPRETATION: The potential risk factors of older age, high SOFA score, and d-dimer greater than 1 µg/mL could help clinicians to identify patients with poor prognosis at an early stage. Prolonged viral shedding provides the rationale for a strategy of isolation of infected patients and optimal antiviral interventions in the future. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences; National Science Grant for Distinguished Young Scholars; National Key Research and Development Program of China; The Beijing Science and Technology Project; and Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development.