IntroductionPneumothorax and pneumomediastinum have both been noted to complicate cases of COVID-19 requiring hospital admission. We report the largest case series yet described of patients with both these pathologies that includes non-ventilated patients.MethodsCases were collected retrospectively from UK hospitals with inclusion criteria limited to a diagnosis of COVID-19 and the presence of either pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum. Patients included in the study presented between March and June 2020. Details obtained from the medical record included demographics, radiology, laboratory investigations, clinical management and survival.ResultsSeventy-one patients from 16 centres were included in the study, of whom 60 patients had pneumothoraces (six also with pneumomediastinum), whilst 11 patients had pneumomediastinum alone. Two of these patients had two distinct episodes of pneumothorax, occurring bilaterally in sequential fashion, bringing the total number of pneumothoraces included to 62. Clinical scenarios included patients who had presented to hospital with pneumothorax, patients who had developed pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum during their inpatient admission with COVID-19 and patients who developed their complication whilst intubated and ventilated, either with or without concurrent extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Survival at 28 days was not significantly different following pneumothorax (63.1%±6.5%) or isolated pneumomediastinum (53.0%±18.7%; p=0.854). The incidence of pneumothorax was higher in males. The 28-day survival was not different between the sexes (males 62.5%±7.7% versus females 68.4%±10.7%; p=0.619). Patients above the age of 70 had a significantly lower 28-day survival than younger individuals (≥70 years 41.7%±13.5% survival versus <70 years 70.9%±6.8% survival; p=0.018 log-rank).ConclusionThese cases suggest that pneumothorax is a complication of COVID-19. Pneumothorax does not seem to be an independent marker of poor prognosis and we encourage active treatment to be continued where clinically possible.
BackgroundA standardised approach to assessing COVID-19 survivors has not been established, largely due to the paucity of data on medium- and long-term sequelae. Interval chest radiograph is recommended following community-acquired pneumonia, however its utility in monitoring recovery from COVID-19 pneumonia remains unclear.MethodsProspective single-centre observational cohort study. Patients hospitalised with severe COVID-19 pneumonia (admission duration ≥48 h and oxygen requirement ≥40% or critical care admission) underwent face-to-face assessment 4–6 weeks post-discharge. Primary outcome: radiological resolution of COVID-19 pneumonitis (Radiographic Assessment of Lung Oedema score <5). Secondary outcomes: clinical outcomes, symptom questionnaires, mental health screening (Trauma Screening Questionnaire, GAD-7, PHQ-9), physiological testing (4-metre gait speed (4MGS), 1-minute sit-to-stand test (STS)).Results119 patients assessed between 3rd June and 2nd July 2020 at median (IQR) 61 (51–67) days post-discharge. Mean±sd age 58.7±14.4 years, body mass index 30.0 (25.9–35.2) kg·m−2, 62% male, 68% ethnic minority. Despite radiographic resolution of pulmonary infiltrates in 87%, mMRC breathlessness scores were above pre-COVID baseline in 46% and patients reported persistent fatigue (68%), sleep disturbance (57%) and breathlessness (32%). Screening thresholds were breached for post-traumatic stress disorder (25%), anxiety (22%) and depression (18%). 4MGS was slow (<0.8 m·s−1) in 38%, 35% desaturated by ≥4% during STS. Of 56 thoracic computed tomography scans performed, 75% demonstrated COVID-related interstitial and/or airways disease.ConclusionsPersistent symptoms, adverse mental health outcomes and physiological impairment are common 2 months after severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Follow-up chest radiograph is a poor marker of recovery, therefore holistic face-to-face assessment is recommended to facilitate early recognition and management of post-COVID sequelae.
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.