Pulmonary sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection and factors associated with persistent abnormal lung function at six months after infection: Prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Information on the long-term pulmonary sequelae following SARS-CoV-2 infection is limited. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of hospitalized and non-hospitalized adult patients age >18 with documented SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR three months prior to enrolment between June and December 2020. Participants underwent full pulmonary function test (PFT), cardiopulmonary exercise testing at 3 months and 6 months. Primary outcome was mean differences of forced vital capacity (FVC), diffuse capacity of lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO), and oxygen consumption (VO2) at 6 vs. 3 months. Secondary outcomes were respiratory outcomes classified into 5 clinical groups-no lung disease, resolved lung disease, persistent lung disease, PFT abnormalities attributable to pre-existing lung disease or other factors, and mild PFT abnormalities of uncertain clinical significance. RESULTS: Fifty-one, 30 hospitalized and 21 non-hospitalized, participants were included. Median age was 51 years; 20 (39.2%) were female. Mean (±SD) percent predicted values of FVC, DLCO and VO2 at 3 vs 6-month-visits were 96.2 ± 15.6 vs. 97.6 ± 15.5, 73.74 ±18 vs. 78.5 ± 15.5, and 75.5 ± 18.9 vs. 76.1 ± 21.5, respectively. Nineteen (37%) patients had physiologic and/or radiographic evidence of lung disease at 3 months with eight (15.7%) continuing to have persistent disease at 6 months. History of diabetes, hypertension, ICU admission and elevated D-Dimer levels were associated with persistent lung disease at 6 months. INTERPRETATION: Persistent lung disease at 6 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection exists. Changes of lung function between 3- and 6-months are not significant. A longer follow-up is required to determine long-term prognosis.

Cardiorespiratory physiology, exertional symptoms, and psychological burden in post-COVID-19 fatigue.

Fatigue is a common, debilitating, and poorly understood symptom post-COVID-19. We sought to better characterize differences in those with and without post-COVID-19 fatigue using cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Despite elevated dyspnoea intensity ratings, V̇O2peak (ml/kg/min) was the only significant difference in the physiological responses to exercise (19.9 ± 7.1 fatigue vs. 24.4 ± 6.7 ml/kg/min non-fatigue, p = 0.04). Consistent with previous findings, we also observed a higher psychological burden in those with fatigue in the context of similar resting cardiopulmonary function. Our findings suggest that lower cardiorespiratory fitness and/or psychological factors may contribute to post-COVID-19 fatigue symptomology. Further research is needed for rehabilitation and symptom management following SARS-CoV-2 infection.