Rationale: The impact of COVID-19 on patients with Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) has not been established. Objectives: To assess outcomes in patients with ILD hospitalized for COVID-19 versus those without ILD in a contemporaneous age, sex and comorbidity matched population. Methods: An international multicenter audit of patients with a prior diagnosis of ILD admitted to hospital with COVID-19 between 1 March and 1 May 2020 was undertaken and compared with patients, without ILD obtained from the ISARIC 4C cohort, admitted with COVID-19 over the same period. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary analysis distinguished IPF from non-IPF ILD and used lung function to determine the greatest risks of death. Measurements and Main Results: Data from 349 patients with ILD across Europe were included, of whom 161 were admitted to hospital with laboratory or clinical evidence of COVID-19 and eligible for propensity-score matching. Overall mortality was 49% (79/161) in patients with ILD with COVID-19. After matching ILD patients with COVID-19 had higher mortality (HR 1.60, Confidence Intervals 1.17-2.18 p=0.003) compared with age, sex and comorbidity matched controls without ILD. Patients with a Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) of <80% had an increased risk of death versus patients with FVC ≥80% (HR 1.72, 1.05-2.83). Furthermore, obese patients with ILD had an elevated risk of death (HR 2.27, 1.39−3.71). Conclusions: Patients with ILD are at increased risk of death from COVID-19, particularly those with poor lung function and obesity. Stringent precautions should be taken to avoid COVID-19 in patients with ILD.
IntroductionIdentifying acute hypercapnic respiratory failure is crucial in the initial management of acute exacerbations of COPD. Guidelines recommend obtaining arterial blood samples but these are more difficult to obtain than venous. We assessed whether blood gas values derived from venous blood could replace arterial at initial assessment.MethodsPatients requiring hospital treatment for an exacerbation of COPD had paired arterial and venous samples taken. Bland–Altman analyses were performed to assess agreement between arterial and venous pH, CO2 and . The relationship between SpO2 and SaO2 was assessed. The number of attempts and pain scores for each sample were measured.Results234 patients were studied. There was good agreement between arterial and venous measures of pH and (mean difference 0.03 and −0.04, limits of agreement −0.05 to 0.11 and −2.90 to 2.82, respectively), and between SaO2 and SpO2 (in patients with an SpO2 of >80%). Arterial sampling required more attempts and was more painful than venous (mean pain score 4 (IQR 2–5) and 1 (IQR 0–2), respectively, p<0.001).ConclusionsArterial sampling is more difficult and more painful than venous sampling. There is good agreement between pH and values derived from venous and arterial blood, and between pulse oximetry and arterial blood gas oxygen saturations. These agreements could allow the initial assessment of COPD exacerbations to be based on venous blood gas analysis and pulse oximetry, simplifying the care pathway and improving the patient experience.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.