Lung function six months after severe COVID-19: Does time, in fact, heal all wounds?

Bretas, Daniel Cruz; Leite, Arnaldo Santos; Mancuzo, Eliane Viana; Prata, Tarciane Aline; Andrade, Bruno Horta; Oliveira, Jacqueline Ferreira; Batista, Aline Priscila; Machado-Coelho, George Luiz Lins; Augusto, Valéria Maria; Marinho, Carolina Coimbra

doi:10.1016/j.bjid.2022.102352

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified 4710 records through PubMed, EMBASE, and ScienceDirect database searches. A total of 51 articles (i.e., 33,573 patients) were selected for analysis based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria [ 6 , 15 , 16 , 18 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 ]. The study selection process was documented in Figure 1 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Long COVID-19 Caused by Different SARS-CoV-2 Strains: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Deng

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although many studies of long COVID-19 were reported, there was a lack of systematic research which assessed the differences of long COVID-19 in regard to what unique SARS-CoV-2 strains caused it. As such, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the characteristics of long COVID-19 that is caused by different SARS-CoV-2 strains. We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and ScienceDirect databases in order to find cohort studies of long COVID-19 as defined by the WHO (Geneva, Switzerland). The main outcomes were in determining the percentages of long COVID-19 among patients who were infected with different SARS-CoV-2 strains. Further, this study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022339964). A total of 51 studies with 33,573 patients was included, of which three studies possessed the Alpha and Delta variants, and five studies possessed the Omicron variant. The highest pooled estimate of long COVID-19 was found in the CT abnormalities (60.5%; 95% CI: 40.4%, 80.6%) for the wild-type strain; fatigue (66.1%; 95% CI: 42.2%, 89.9%) for the Alpha variant; and ≥1 general symptoms (28.4%; 95% CI: 7.9%, 49.0%) for the Omicron variant. The pooled estimates of ≥1 general symptoms (65.8%; 95% CI: 47.7%, 83.9%) and fatigue were the highest symptoms found among patients infected with the Alpha variant, followed by the wild-type strain, and then the Omicron variant. The pooled estimate of myalgia was highest among patients infected with the Omicron variant (11.7%; 95%: 8.3%, 15.1%), compared with those infected with the wild-type strain (9.4%; 95%: 6.3%, 12.5%). The pooled estimate of sleep difficulty was lowest among the patients infected with the Delta variant (2.5%; 95%: 0.2%, 4.9%) when compared with those infected with the wild-type strain (24.5%; 95%: 17.5%, 31.5%) and the Omicron variant (18.7%; 95%: 1.0%, 36.5%). The findings of this study suggest that there is no significant difference between long COVID-19 that has been caused by different strains, except in certain general symptoms (i.e., in the Alpha or Omicron variant) and in sleep difficulty (i.e., the wild-type strain). In the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its emerging variants, directing more attention to long COVID-19 that is caused by unique strains, as well as implementing targeted intervention measures to address it are vital.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Long COVID-19 Caused by Different SARS-CoV-2 Strains: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Deng

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies evaluated functional capacity in COVID-19 survivors hospitalized in the acute phase. The study by Bretas et al, (2022) in Brazil assessed 6MWT in hospitalized patients on day 45 and day 180. This study found a significant improvement at the two measurement times.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

association of baseline C-reactive protein and D-dimer levels with six-minute walk test in severe COVID-19 survivors

Wadanta

Somia

Arisanti

et al. 2022

ijhs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The post-COVID-19 syndrome can affect the patients' activities. The hyperinflammatory response resulting in permanent organ system damage or prolonged inflammation is thought to cause persistent symptoms. Inflammatory and coagulation markers C-reactive protein (CRP) and d-dimer may increase in acute phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated with unexpected outcome. Therefore, the researcher wanted to assess the association of baseline CRP and d-dimer levels with the six-minute walk test (6MWT) in severe COVID-19 survivors. This is a cross-sectional, observational analytic study. A total 80 participants were included in this study. The proportion of subjects with poor results of 6MWT was 71.3%. Bivariate analysis of high baseline level of CRP and d-dimer, and age 65 years old on the 6MWT showed significant results, with prevalence ratio (PR) consecutively 1.8 (95% CI1.408-2.284;p= <0.001),1.4 (95% CI1.165-1.796;p=0.018) , and 1.5 (95% CI 1.287-1.831; p= 0.008). Based on multivariate analysis, only high baseline level of CRP was significant (PR = 1.8, 95% CI 1.051-3.136; p = 0.032). The proportion of severe COVID-19 survivors with poor 6MWT was high. There is a significant association between high baseline levels of CRP with a poor 6MWT in severe COVID-19 survivors.

show abstract

“…Our findings indicated a significant increase in dyspnea risk among hospitalized COVID-19 survivors compared with non-hospitalized. A multicenter prospective study by Bretas et al ( 37 ) demonstrated that the prevalence of dyspnea was as high as 64.7% in ward admission. The potential reason why high dyspnea risk presented in hospitalized COVID-19 survivors compared with non-hospitalized is COVID-induced persistent abnormality within the microstructure of the lungs or in the pulmonary vasculature ( 38 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-acute COVID-19 symptom risk in hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Yuan

Sun

et al. 2023

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPost-acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms occurred in most of the COVID-19 survivors. However, few studies have examined the issue of whether hospitalization results in different post-acute COVID-19 symptom risks. This study aimed to compare potential COVID-19 long-term effects in hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 survivors.MethodsThis study is designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. A systematic search of six databases was performed for identifying articles published from inception until April 20th, 2022, which compared post-acute COVID-19 symptom risk in hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 survivors using a predesigned search strategy included terms for SARS-CoV-2 (eg, COVID, coronavirus, and 2019-nCoV), post-acute COVID-19 Syndrome (eg, post-COVID, post COVID conditions, chronic COVID symptom, long COVID, long COVID symptom, long-haul COVID, COVID sequelae, convalescence, and persistent COVID symptom), and hospitalization (hospitalized, in hospital, and home-isolated). The present meta-analysis was conducted according to The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement using R software 4.1.3 to create forest plots. Q statistics and the I2 index were used to evaluate heterogeneity in this meta-analysis.ResultsSix observational studies conducted in Spain, Austria, Switzerland, Canada, and the USA involving 419 hospitalized and 742 non-hospitalized COVID-19 survivors were included. The number of COVID-19 survivors in included studies ranged from 63 to 431, and follow-up data were collected through visits in four studies and another two used an electronic questionnaire, visit and telephone, respectively. Significant increase in the risks of long dyspnea (OR = 3.18, 95% CI = 1.90–5.32), anxiety (OR = 3.09, 95% CI = 1.47–6.47), myalgia (OR = 2.33, 95% CI = 1.02–5.33), and hair loss (OR = 2.76, 95% CI = 1.07–7.12) risk were found in hospitalized COVID-19 survivors compared with outpatients. Conversely, persisting ageusia risk was significantly reduced in hospitalized COVID-19 survivors than in non-hospitalized patients.ConclusionThe findings suggested that special attention and patient-centered rehabilitation service based on a needs survey should be provided for hospitalized COVID-19 survivors who experienced high post-acute COVID-19 symptoms risk.

show abstract

Lung function six months after severe COVID-19: Does time, in fact, heal all wounds?

Cited by 13 publications

References 30 publications

Comparison of Long COVID-19 Caused by Different SARS-CoV-2 Strains: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Comparison of Long COVID-19 Caused by Different SARS-CoV-2 Strains: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

association of baseline C-reactive protein and D-dimer levels with six-minute walk test in severe COVID-19 survivors

Post-acute COVID-19 symptom risk in hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About