The aim of our study was to determine the impact of unsupervised Pulmonary Rehabilitation (uns-PR) on patients recovering from COVID-19, and determine its anthropometric, biological, demographic and fitness correlates. All patients (n = 20, age: 64.1 ± 9.9 years, 75% male) participated in unsupervised Pulmonary Rehabilitation program for eight weeks. We recorded anthropometric characteristics, pulmonary function parameters, while we performed 6 min walk test (6 MWT) and blood sampling for oxidative stress measurement before and after uns-PR. We observed differences before and after uns-PR during 6 MWT in hemodynamic parameters [systolic blood pressure in resting (138.7 ± 16.3 vs. 128.8 ± 8.6 mmHg, p = 0.005) and end of test (159.8 ± 13.5 vs. 152.0 ± 12.2 mmHg, p = 0.025), heart rate (5th min: 111.6 ± 16.9 vs. 105.4 ± 15.9 bpm, p = 0.049 and 6th min: 112.5 ± 18.3 vs. 106.9 ± 17.9 bpm, p = 0.039)], in oxygen saturation (4th min: 94.6 ± 2.9 vs. 95.8 ± 3.2%, p = 0.013 and 1st min of recovery: 97.8 ± 0.9 vs. 97.3 ± 0.9%), in dyspnea at the end of 6 MWT (1.3 ± 1.5 vs. 0.6 ± 0.9 score, p = 0.005), in distance (433.8 ± 102.2 vs. 519.2 ± 95.4 m, p < 0.001), in estimated O2 uptake (14.9 ± 2.4 vs. 16.9 ± 2.2 mL/min/kg, p < 0.001) in 30 s sit to stand (11.4 ± 3.2 vs. 14.1 ± 2.7 repetitions, p < 0.001)] Moreover, in plasma antioxidant capacity (2528.3 ± 303.2 vs. 2864.7 ± 574.8 U.cor., p = 0.027), in body composition parameters [body fat (32.2 ± 9.4 vs. 29.5 ± 8.2%, p = 0.003), visceral fat (14.0 ± 4.4 vs. 13.3 ± 4.2 score, p = 0.021), neck circumference (39.9 ± 3.4 vs. 37.8 ± 4.2 cm, p = 0.006) and muscle mass (30.1 ± 4.6 vs. 34.6 ± 7.4 kg, p = 0.030)] and sleep quality (6.7 ± 3.9 vs. 5.6 ± 3.3 score, p = 0.036) we observed differences before and after uns-PR. Our findings support the implementation of unsupervised pulmonary rehabilitation programs in patients following COVID-19 recovery, targeting the improvement of many aspects of long COVID-19 syndrome.

Background Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) represents a chronic lung disease with unpredictable course. Methods We aimed to investigate prognostic performance of complete blood count parameters in IPF. Treatment-naïve patients with IPF were retrospectively enrolled from two independent cohorts (derivation and validation) and split into subgroups (high and low) based on median baseline monocyte count and red cell distribution width (RDW). Results Overall, 489 patients (derivation cohort: 300, validation cohort: 189) were analyzed. In the derivation cohort, patients with monocyte count ≥ 0.60 K/μL had significantly lower median FVC%pred [75.0, (95% CI 71.3–76.7) vs. 80.9, (95% CI 77.5–83.1), (P = 0.01)] and DLCO%pred [47.5, (95% CI 44.3–52.3) vs. 53.0, (95% CI 48.0–56.7), (P = 0.02)] than patients with monocyte count < 0.60 K/μL. Patients with RDW ≥ 14.1% had significantly lower median FVC%pred [75.5, (95% CI 71.2–79.2) vs. 78.3, (95% CI 76.0–81.0), (P = 0.04)] and DLCO%pred [45.4, (95% CI 43.3–50.5) vs. 53.0, (95% CI 50.8–56.8), (P = 0.008)] than patients with RDW < 14.1%. Cut-off thresholds from the derivation cohort were applied to the validation cohort with similar discriminatory value, as indicated by significant differences in median DLCO%pred between patients with high vs. low monocyte count [37.8, (95% CI 35.5–41.1) vs. 45.5, (95% CI 41.9–49.4), (P < 0.001)] and RDW [37.9, (95% CI 33.4–40.7) vs. 44.4, (95% CI 41.5–48.9), (P < 0.001)]. Patients with high monocyte count and RDW of the validation cohort exhibited a trend towards lower median FVC%pred (P = 0.09) and significantly lower median FVC%pred (P = 0.001), respectively. Kaplan–Meier analysis in the derivation cohort demonstrated higher all-cause mortality in patients with high (≥ 0.60 K/μL) vs. low monocyte count (< 0.60 K/μL) [HR 2.05, (95% CI 1.19–3.53), (P = 0.01)]. Conclusions Increased monocyte count and RDW may represent negative prognostic biomarkers in patients with IPF.

The PERSEIDS study aimed to estimate incidence/prevalence of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs), fibrosing Interstitial lung diseases (F-ILDs), idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), systemic sclerosis-associated ILD (SSc-ILD), other non-IPF F-ILDs and their progressive-fibrosing (PF) forms in six European countries, as current data are scarce.This retrospective, two-phase study used aggregate data (2014–2018). In Phase 1, incident/prevalent cases of ILDs above were identified from clinical databases through an algorithm based on codes/keywords, and incidence/prevalence was estimated. For non-IPF F–ILDs, the relative percentage of subtypes was also determined. In Phase 2, a subset of non-IPF F-ILD cases was manually reviewed to determine the percentage of PF behaviour and usual interstitial pneumonia-like (UIP-like) pattern. A weighted mean percentage of progression was calculated for each country and used to extrapolate incidence/prevalence of progressive-fibrosing ILDs (PF–ILDs).In 2018, incidence/105 person-years ranged between 9.4–83.6(ILDs), 7.7–76.2(F-ILDs), 0.4–10.3(IPF), 6.6–71.7(non-IPF F-ILDs) and 0.3–1.5(SSc-ILD); and prevalence/105 persons ranged between 33.6–247.4(ILDs), 26.7–236.8(F-ILDs), 2.8–31.0(IPF), 22.3–205.8(non-IPF F-ILDs) and 1.4–10.1(SSc-ILD). Among non-IPF F-ILDs, sarcoidosis was the most frequent subtype. PF behaviour and UIP-like pattern were present in a third of non-IPF F-ILD cases each and hypersensitivity pneumonitis showed the highest percentage of progressive behaviour. Incidence of PF-ILDs ranged between 2.1–14.5/105 person-years, and prevalence between 6.9–78.0/105 persons.To our knowledge, PERSEIDS is the first study assessing incidence, prevalence and rate of progression of ILDs across several European countries. Still below the threshold for orphan diseases, the estimates obtained were higher and more variable than reported in previous studies, but differences in study design/population must be considered.

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> During the first COVID-19 wave, a considerable decline in hospital admissions was observed worldwide. <b><i>Aim:</i></b> This retrospective cohort study aimed to assess if there were any changes in the number of patients hospitalized for respiratory diseases in Greece during the first CO­VID-19 wave. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> In the present study, we evaluated respiratory disease hospitalization rates across 9 tertiary hospitals in Greece during the study period (March–April 2020) and the corresponding period of the 2 previous years (2018–2019) that served as the control periods. Demographic data and discharge diagnosis were documented for every patient. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of the 1,307 patients who were hospitalized during the study period, 444 (35.5%) were males with a mean (±SD) age of 66.1 ± 16.6 years. There was a 47 and 46% reduction in all-cause respiratory morbidity compared to the corresponding periods of 2018 and 2019, respectively. The mean incidence rate for respiratory diseases during the study period was 21.4 admissions per day, and this rate was significantly lower than the rate during the same period in 2018 (40.8 admissions per day; incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.525; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.491–0.562; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001) or the rate during 2019 (39.9 admissions per day; IRR, 0.537; 95% CI, 0.502–0.574; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001). The greatest reductions (%) in the number of daily admissions in 2020 were observed for sleep apnoea (87% vs. 2018 and 84% vs. 2019) followed by admissions for asthma (76% vs. 2018 and 79% vs. 2019) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (60% vs. 2018 and 51% vs. 2019), while the lowest reductions were detected in hospitalizations for pulmonary embolism (6% vs. 2018 and 23% vs. 2019) followed by tuberculosis (25% vs. both 2018 and 2019). <b><i>Discussion/Conclusion:</i></b> The significant reduction in respiratory admissions in 2020 raises the reasonable question of whether some patients may have avoided seeking medical attention during the COVID-19 pandemic and suggests an urgent need for transformation of healthcare systems during the pandemic to offer appropriate management of respiratory diseases other than COVID-19.

No abstract