Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Lancet ; 398(10302): 747-758, 2021 08 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1376121

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The full range of long-term health consequences of COVID-19 in patients who are discharged from hospital is largely unclear. The aim of our study was to comprehensively compare consequences between 6 months and 12 months after symptom onset among hospital survivors with COVID-19. METHODS: We undertook an ambidirectional cohort study of COVID-19 survivors who had been discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital (Wuhan, China) between Jan 7 and May 29, 2020. At 6-month and 12-month follow-up visit, survivors were interviewed with questionnaires on symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and received a physical examination, a 6-min walking test, and laboratory tests. They were required to report their health-care use after discharge and work status at the 12-month visit. Survivors who had completed pulmonary function tests or had lung radiographic abnormality at 6 months were given the corresponding tests at 12 months. Non-COVID-19 participants (controls) matched for age, sex, and comorbidities were interviewed and completed questionnaires to assess prevalent symptoms and HRQoL. The primary outcomes were symptoms, modified British Medical Research Council (mMRC) score, HRQoL, and distance walked in 6 min (6MWD). Multivariable adjusted logistic regression models were used to evaluate the risk factors of 12-month outcomes. FINDINGS: 1276 COVID-19 survivors completed both visits. The median age of patients was 59·0 years (IQR 49·0-67·0) and 681 (53%) were men. The median follow-up time was 185·0 days (IQR 175·0-198·0) for the 6-month visit and 349·0 days (337·0-361·0) for the 12-month visit after symptom onset. The proportion of patients with at least one sequelae symptom decreased from 68% (831/1227) at 6 months to 49% (620/1272) at 12 months (p<0·0001). The proportion of patients with dyspnoea, characterised by mMRC score of 1 or more, slightly increased from 26% (313/1185) at 6-month visit to 30% (380/1271) at 12-month visit (p=0·014). Additionally, more patients had anxiety or depression at 12-month visit (26% [331/1271] at 12-month visit vs 23% [274/1187] at 6-month visit; p=0·015). No significant difference on 6MWD was observed between 6 months and 12 months. 88% (422/479) of patients who were employed before COVID-19 had returned to their original work at 12 months. Compared with men, women had an odds ratio of 1·43 (95% CI 1·04-1·96) for fatigue or muscle weakness, 2·00 (1·48-2·69) for anxiety or depression, and 2·97 (1·50-5·88) for diffusion impairment. Matched COVID-19 survivors at 12 months had more problems with mobility, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression, and had more prevalent symptoms than did controls. INTERPRETATION: Most COVID-19 survivors had a good physical and functional recovery during 1-year follow-up, and had returned to their original work and life. The health status in our cohort of COVID-19 survivors at 12 months was still lower than that in the control population. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the National Key Research and Development Program of China, Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, the China Evergrande Group, Jack Ma Foundation, Sino Biopharmaceutical, Ping An Insurance (Group), and New Sunshine Charity Foundation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Survivors , Aged , Anxiety/etiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/psychology , Depression/etiology , Exercise Tolerance , Fatigue/etiology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Lung/physiopathology , Male , Middle Aged , Muscle Weakness/etiology , Quality of Life , SARS-CoV-2 , Walk Test
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(10): e545-e551, 2021 05 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1232187

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The characteristics of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) and antibody against major antigen proteins related to clinical outcomes in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients were still less known. METHODS: NAbs and antibodies targeting nucleocapsid (N), spike protein (S), and the receptor-binding domain (RBD) in longitudinal plasma samples from the LOTUS China trial were measured by microneutralization assay and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Viral load was determined by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). A total of 576 plasma and 576 throat swabs were collected from 191 COVID-19 patients. Antibody titers related to adverse outcome and clinical improvement were analyzed. Multivariable adjusted generalized linear mixed model for random effects were developed. RESULTS: After day 28 post symptoms onset, the rate of antibody positivity reached 100% for RBD-immunoglobulin M (IgM), 97.8% for S-IgM, 100% for N-immunoglobulin G (IgG), 100% for RBD-IgG, 91.1% for N-IgM, and 91.1% for NAbs. The NAbs titers increased over time in both survivors and nonsurvivors and correlated to IgG antibodies against N, S, and RBD, whereas its presence showed no statistical correlation with death. N-IgG (slope -2.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.04 to -1.18, P < .0001), S-IgG (slope -2.44, 95% CI -3.35 to -1.54, P < .0001), and RBD-IgG (slope -1.43, 95% CI -1.98 to -.88, P < .0001) were negatively correlated with viral load. S-IgG titers were lower in nonsurvivors than survivors (P = .020) at week 4 after symptoms onset. CONCLUSIONS: IgM and IgG against N, S, and RBD and NAbs developed in most severe COVID-19 patients and do not correlate clearly with clinical outcomes. The levels of IgG antibodies against N, S, and RBD were related to viral clearance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Antibodies, Viral , Antibody Formation , China/epidemiology , Humans , Immunoglobulin M , SARS-CoV-2
3.
The Lancet ; 397(10270):220-232, 2021.
Article in English | APA PsycInfo | ID: covidwho-1164655

ABSTRACT

Presents a study which aims to examine consequences of COVID-19 in patients discharged from hospital for 6-months. This ambidirectional cohort study was done at Jin Yin-tan Hospital, the first designated hospital for patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, Hubei, China. Clinical data for acute phase were retrieved from electronic medical records, including demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, laboratory test results;and treatment. The disease severity was characterized by the highest seven-category scale during the hospital stay. Data were managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools in order to minimize missing inputs and allow for real-time data validation and quality control. Follow-up consultations were done in the outpatient clinic of Jin Yin-tan Hospital. All participants were interviewed face-to-face by trained physicians and asked to complete a series of questionnaires. For the symptom questionnaire, participants were asked to report newly occurring and persistent symptoms, or any symptoms worse than before COVID-19 development. A total of 2469 patients with COVID-19 were discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital between Jan 7, and May 29, 2020, and the follow-up study was done from June 16, 2020, to Sept 3, 2020. This is the largest cohort study with the longest follow-up duration assessing the health consequences of adult patients discharged from hospital recovering from COVID-19. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

4.
Lancet ; 397(10270): 220-232, 2021 01 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1065678

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Quality of Life , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/statistics & numerical data , China/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Fatigue/epidemiology , Fatigue/etiology , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Muscle Weakness/epidemiology , Muscle Weakness/etiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Sleep Wake Disorders/epidemiology , Sleep Wake Disorders/etiology , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
N Engl J Med ; 382(19): 1787-1799, 2020 05 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-9371

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, which causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, and an oxygen saturation (Sao2) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pao2) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) of less than 300 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lopinavir-ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, or standard care alone. The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent randomization; 99 were assigned to the lopinavir-ritonavir group, and 100 to the standard-care group. Treatment with lopinavir-ritonavir was not associated with a difference from standard care in the time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio for clinical improvement, 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.80). Mortality at 28 days was similar in the lopinavir-ritonavir group and the standard-care group (19.2% vs. 25.0%; difference, -5.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -17.3 to 5.7). The percentages of patients with detectable viral RNA at various time points were similar. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir-ritonavir led to a median time to clinical improvement that was shorter by 1 day than that observed with standard care (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.91). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the lopinavir-ritonavir group, but serious adverse events were more common in the standard-care group. Lopinavir-ritonavir treatment was stopped early in 13 patients (13.8%) because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir-ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308.).


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus/genetics , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A Inhibitors/adverse effects , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intention to Treat Analysis , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Patient Acuity , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Proportional Hazards Models , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Ritonavir/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , Time-to-Treatment , Treatment Failure , Viral Load
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL