Tag: long covid assessment

Chronic Fatigue Associated with Post-COVID Syndrome versus Transient Fatigue Caused by High-Intensity Exercise: Are They Comparable in Terms of Vascular Effects?

Abstract:

Purpose: The pathophysiology of chronic fatigue associated with post-COVID syndrome is not well recognized. It is assumed that this condition is partly due to vascular dysfunction developed during an acute phase of infection. There is great demand for a diagnostic tool that is able to clinically assess post-COVID syndrome and monitor the rehabilitation process.

Patients and methods: The Flow Mediated Skin Fluorescence (FMSF) technique appears uniquely suitable for the analysis of basal microcirculatory oscillations and reactive hyperemia induced by transient ischemia. The FMSF was used to measure vascular circulation in 45 patients with post-COVID syndrome. The results were compared with those for a group of 26 amateur runners before and after high-intensity exercise as well as for a control group of 32 healthy age-matched individuals.

Results: Based on the observed changes in the NOI (Normoxia Oscillatory Index) and RHR (Reactive Hyperemia Response) parameters measured with the FMSF technique, it was found that chronic fatigue associated with post-COVID syndrome is comparable with transient fatigue caused by high-intensity exercise in terms of vascular effects, which are associated with vascular stress in the macrocirculation and microcirculation. Acute and chronic fatigue symptomatology shared similarly altered changes in the NOI and RHR parameters and both can be linked to calcium homeostasis modification.

Conclusion: The NOI and RHR parameters measured with the FMSF technique can be used for non-invasive clinical assessment of post-COVID syndrome as well as for monitoring the rehabilitation process.

Source: Chudzik M, Cender A, Mordaka R, Zielinski J, Katarzynska J, Marcinek A, Gebicki J. Chronic Fatigue Associated with Post-COVID Syndrome versus Transient Fatigue Caused by High-Intensity Exercise: Are They Comparable in Terms of Vascular Effects? Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2022 Sep 6;18:711-719. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S371468. PMID: 36097586; PMCID: PMC9464031.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9464031/ (Full text)

Long COVID: which symptoms can be attributed to SARS-CoV-2 infection?

Comment:

Mortality rates following SARS-CoV-2 infection have decreased as a consequence of public health policies, vaccination, and acute antiviral and anti-inflammatory theBrightling CE, Evans RA. Long COVID: which symptoms can be attributed to SARS-CoV-2 infection? Lancet. 2022 Aug 6;400(10350):411-413. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01385-X. PMID: 35933996; PMCID: PMC9352303.rapies. However, in the wake of the pandemic, post-acute sequelae of COVID-19, or long COVID, has emerged: a chronic illness in people who have ongoing multidimensional symptomatology and disability weeks to years after the initial infection. Early reports of long COVID prevalence, summarised in a systematic review examining the frequency and variety of persistent symptoms after COVID-19, found that the median proportion of people who had at least one persistent symptom 60 days or more after diagnosis or at least 30 days after recovery from COVID-19 infection was 73%. However, the estimated prevalence depends on the duration, population, and symptoms used to define long COVID. More recently, community-based studies have suggested a lower prevalence of persistent symptoms; whereas among people who were hospitalised following COVID-19 infection, a high proportion do not fully recover (50–70%)., , 

Read the rest of this comment HERE.

Source: Brightling CE, Evans RA. Long COVID: which symptoms can be attributed to SARS-CoV-2 infection? Lancet. 2022 Aug 6;400(10350):411-413. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01385-X. PMID: 35933996; PMCID: PMC9352303. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9352303/ (Full text)

The presence of symptoms within 6 months after COVID-19: a single-center longitudinal study

Abstract:

Background: Characterizing the post-COVID health conditions is helpful to direct patients to appropriate healthcare.

Aims: To describe the presence of symptoms in COVID-19 patients within 6 months after diagnosis and to investigate the associated factors in terms of reporting symptoms.

Methods: Data of DEU-COVIMER (a telephone interview-based COVID-19 follow-up center established in a tertiary care hospital) was analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive participants aged ≥ 18 years from November 1st, 2020, to May 31st, 2021. Symptom frequencies were stratified by demographic and clinical characteristics at one, three, and 6 months after diagnosis. With the patients who had symptoms at baseline, generalized estimating equations were applied to identify the factors associated with reporting of symptoms.

Results: A total of 5610 patients agreed to participate in the study. Symptom frequency was 37.2%, 21.8%, and 18.2% for the first, third, and sixth months. Tiredness/fatigue, muscle or body aches, and dyspnea/difficulty breathing were the most common symptoms in all time frames. In multivariate analysis, older age, female gender (odds ratio OR 1.74, 95% confidence interval 1.57-1.93), bad economic status (OR 1.37, 1.14-1.65), current smoking (OR 1.15, 1.02-1.29), being fully vaccinated before COVID-19 (OR 0.53, 0.40-0.72), having more health conditions (≥ 3 conditions, OR 1.78, 1.33-2.37), having more symptoms (> 5 symptoms, OR 2.47, 2.19-2.78), and hospitalization (intensive care unit, OR 2.18, 1.51-3.14) were associated with reporting of symptoms.

Conclusions: This study identifies risk factors for patients who experience post-COVID-19 symptoms. Healthcare providers should appropriately allocate resources prioritizing the patients who would benefit from post-COVID rehabilitation.

Source: Emecen AN, Keskin S, Turunc O, Suner AF, Siyve N, Basoglu Sensoy E, Dinc F, Kilinc O, Avkan Oguz V, Bayrak S, Unal B. The presence of symptoms within 6 months after COVID-19: a single-center longitudinal study. Ir J Med Sci. 2022 Jun 17:1–10. doi: 10.1007/s11845-022-03072-0. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35715663; PMCID: PMC9205653. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9205653/ (Full text)

Exploring trajectory recovery curves of post-COVID cognitive symptoms in previously hospitalized COVID-19 survivors: the LONG-COVID-EXP-CM multicenter study

Dear Sirs,

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, responsible of causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), primary affects the respiratory system; however, neurological symptoms (e.g., ageusia, anosmia, headache) and also other severe complication are commonly experienced at the acute phase [, ]. Neurological symptoms presented at the acute COVID-19 phase such as headache [] or anosmia [] are likely present at a post-COVID phase; however, other neurological symptoms, e.g., cognitive disorders, are “de novo” developed in up to 22% of COVID-19 survivors []. A recent meta-analysis reported prevalence rates of 32%, 27% and 22% for post-COVID brain fog, memory loss, and attention/concentration problems the six months after respectively []. However, the presence of post-COVID cognitive symptoms are questioned by others [].

Interestingly, the recent definition of post-COVID includes cognitive dysfunction as one of the most common symptoms, after fatigue or dyspnoea []. The presence of post-COVID symptoms is overall associated with worse quality of life []. In fact, the presence of post-COVID cognitive symptoms represents a challenge for affected individuals since these symptoms affect daily life []. Although the presence of post-COVID cognitive symptoms is associated with nervous system changes [], it seems that these symptoms generally improve over time []. However, most studies investigating these symptoms have used cross-sectional designs. Therefore, understanding the longitudinal pattern of post-COVID cognitive symptoms may have significant implications in diagnosis, triaging, and management of post-COVID individuals.

Read the rest of this article HERE.

Source: Fernández-de-Las-Peñas C, Martín-Guerrero JD, Cancela-Cilleruelo I, Rodríguez-Jiménez J, Moro-López-Menchero P, Pellicer-Valero OJ. Exploring trajectory recovery curves of post-COVID cognitive symptoms in previously hospitalized COVID-19 survivors: the LONG-COVID-EXP-CM multicenter study. J Neurol. 2022 May 10:1–5. doi: 10.1007/s00415-022-11176-x. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35538169; PMCID: PMC9090121. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9090121/ (Full text)

Long COVID: aiming for a consensus

The spectrum of signs and symptoms that can newly occur and persist for months to years after SARS-CoV-2 infection was initially named long COVID. This term was collectively created by the patient community in the spring of 2020, and was later followed by other terms, such as post-COVID-19 condition, post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and post-COVID syndrome. This condition can affect different organs and body systems, with a wide range of signs and symptoms reported. Given the magnitude of the sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, it is essential to agree upon the nomenclature and definition to assess its incidence, subtypes, and severity. This process cannot be left to agencies, health-care providers, or researchers alone, but requires extensive consultation, notably including the people affected.

In early 2021, WHO established technical working groups to provide a clinical case definition for this condition and amplified the calls of patient groups for recognition, research, and rehabilitation. A rapidly increasing number of studies started to investigate the incidence and prevalence, features, and risk factors of the prolonged sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the underlying mechanisms, and case management approaches.

There are concerns about differences in terminology, with some public health experts and policy makers avoiding the term long COVID. The use of different terms can raise worries, especially among those with lived experience of the condition who originally coined the term long COVID. Many issues have been raised by patient-researchers and other adopters of the term. One issue is epistemic injustice in medicine, including the poor recognition of patient-led expertise. Patient perspectives emphasise the tradition in medical history that those who first identify and describe a condition, name it. In the case of long COVID, it was people with lived experience of it who brought it to the world’s attention and described it via a wide range of methods. The first publication on prolonged symptoms of COVID-19 was authored by patient-researchers with long COVID, later known as the Patient-Led Research Collaborative. Another issue is that the severity, features, and urgency of long COVID—as highlighted by patients—are not fully addressed within the framework of other terms and definitions. Long COVID remains the patient-preferred term.

Read the rest of this article HERE.

Source: Munblit D, O’Hara ME, Akrami A, Perego E, Olliaro P, Needham DM. Long COVID: aiming for a consensus [published online ahead of print, 2022 May 4]. Lancet Respir Med. 2022;S2213-2600(22)00135-7. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(22)00135-7 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9067938/ (Full text)

Frailty assessment for COVID-19 follow-up: a prospective cohort study

Abstract:

Background: The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is increasingly used for clinical decision making in acute care but little is known about frailty after COVID-19.

Objectives: To investigate frailty and the CFS for post-COVID-19 follow-up.

Methods: This prospective multicentre cohort study included COVID-19 survivors aged ≥50 years presenting for a follow-up visit ≥3 months after the acute illness. Nine centres retrospectively collected pre-COVID-19 CFS and prospectively CFS at follow-up. Three centres completed the Frailty Index (FI), the short physical performance battery (SPPB), 30 s sit-to-stand test and handgrip strength measurements. Mixed effect logistic regression models accounting for repeated measurements and potential confounders were used to investigate factors associated with post-COVID-19 CFS. Criterion and construct validity were determined by correlating the CFS to other concurrently assessed frailty measurements and measures of respiratory impairment, respectively.

Results: Of the 288 participants 65% were men, mean (SD) age was 65.1 (9) years. Median (IQR) CFS at follow-up was 3 (2-3), 21% were vulnerable or frail (CFS ≥4). The CFS was responsive to change, correlated with the FI (r=0.69, p<0.001), the SPPB score (r=-0.48, p<0.001) (criterion validity) and with the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score (r=0.59, p<0.001), forced vital capacity %-predicted (r=-0.25, p<0.001), 6 min walk distance (r=-0.39, p<0.001) and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) (r=0.59, p<0.001). Dyspnoea was significantly associated with a higher odds for vulnerability/frailty (per one mMRC adjusted OR 2.01 (95% CI 1.13 to 3.58), p=0.02).

Conclusions: The CFS significantly increases with COVID-19, and dyspnoea is an important risk factor for post-COVID-19 frailty and should be addressed thoroughly.

Source: Müller I, Mancinetti M, Renner A, Bridevaux PO, Brutsche MH, Clarenbach C, Garzoni C, Lenoir A, Naccini B, Ott S, Piquilloud L, Prella M, Que YA, Soccal PM, von Garnier C, Geiser TK, Funke-Chambour M, Guler S. Frailty assessment for COVID-19 follow-up: a prospective cohort study. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2022 Apr;9(1):e001227. doi: 10.1136/bmjresp-2022-001227. PMID: 35459694. https://bmjopenrespres.bmj.com/content/9/1/e001227.long (Full text)