Literature DB >> 34848374

Long-term persistence of symptoms of dyspnoea in COVID-19 patients.

Nhu Ngoc Nguyen1, Van Thuan Hoang2, Thi Loi Dao2, Line Meddeb3, Jean-Christophe Lagier4, Matthieu Million4, Didier Raoult4, Philippe Gautret5.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; dyspnoea; long COVID

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34848374      PMCID: PMC8627107          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.11.035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Infect Dis        ISSN: 1201-9712            Impact factor:   12.074


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor Even after recovering from the acute phase of COVID-19, patients may report the persistence of symptoms that have become known as ‘long COVID’ (Akbarialiabad ). In one meta-analysis of nine studies conducted on 1,816 patients between three weeks and three months after discharge from hospital, the persistence of dyspnoea, chest pain and a cough affected 37%, 16% and 14% of patients, respectively (Cares-Marambio ). These proportions gradually decrease with follow-up time. In a cross-sectional study conducted on 574 patients eight months after recovery, dyspnoea was the most frequent sequelae affecting 29% of patients (Zheng ). In one prospective cohort study conducted on 588 COVID-19 patients, 14% of patients reported dyspnoea at eight months of follow-up (Soraas ). In this study, we aim to estimate the rate of persistent dyspnoea in French COVID-19 patients, as evaluated after at least six months of follow-up and to investigate the risk factors for this persistence. We identified confirmed COVID-19 patients who reported dyspnoea during the acute phase of the disease from among a cohort of 3,737 patients tested at our institute between 3 March and 27 April 2020 (Lagier ). Patients with pre-existing chronic respiratory diseases and chronic heart disease were excluded from this analysis. Information on demographics, comorbidities, and acute symptoms were retrieved from medical files. The selected patients were interviewed by telephone and asked to complete a questionnaire on possible persistent dyspnoea. Statistical analysis was performed by R 3.6.1 software (R Core team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2020. URL: http://www.r-project.org). Multiple logistic regression model were applied to explore the association between patient characteristics and dyspnoea at the acute phase and at the follow-up time. Variables with p-values < 0.2 in the univariable analysis were included in the multivariable analysis. Of the 3,737 COVID-19 patients, 3,222 had no known chronic respiratory disease and/or chronic heart disease at the time of inclusion and 880/3,222 (27.3%) reported dyspnoea at the acute phase of COVID-19. Being female or obese and consulting six or more days after the onset of symptoms were independently associated with dyspnoea. Patients with dyspnoea at admission were more likely to receive oxygen therapy. In univariate analysis, hypoxaemia, oxygen saturation ≤94%, C-reactive protein >5 mg/L, neutrophils >7.5 Giga/L, eosinophils <0.1 Giga/L, lymphocyte <1 Giga/L associated with dyspnoea, but a multivariate analysis was not conducted due to a high proportion of missing information. (Table 1 ). Of 880 patients, we randomly selected 838 patients for the telephone interview. Among them, 496/838 (59.2%) answered the questionnaire and 342/838 (40.8%) were lost to follow-up. Patients who responded were significantly less likely to report hypertension, to present severe symptoms, to require oxygen upon inclusion, to undergo prolonged hospitalisation and had lower rates of mortality, as compared with all patients reporting dyspnoea at inclusion (Supplementary Table 1)
Table 1

Risk factors for dyspnoea during the acute phase (n=3,222)

No dyspnoea (n=2,342)%Dyspnoea (n=880)%Univariate analysisMultivariate analysis**
OR [95%CI] p-valueOR [95%CI] p-value
AgeMean ± SD43.6 ± 15.843.7 ± 15.5
Range18–9618–94
< 45 (n=1,720)1,255(53.6)465(52.8)ref
≥ 45 (n=1,502)1,087(46.4)415(47.2)1.03[0.88–1.21]0.71
SexMale (n=1,464)1,107(47.3)357(40.6)refref
Females (n=1,758)1,235(52.7)523(59.4)1.31[1.12–1.54]0.00071.38[1.17–1.61]0.0001
Chronic conditions
HypertensionNo (n=2,845)2,080(88.8)765(86.9)ref
Yes (n=377)262(11.2)115(13.1)1.19[0.94–1.52]0.14
DiabetesNo (n=2999)2179(93.0)820(93.2)ref
Yes (n=223)163(7.0)60(6.8)0.98[0.71–1.34]0.89
CancerNo (n=3,138)2,280(97.4)858(97.5)ref
Yes (n=84)62(2.6)22(2.5)0.94[0.55–1.56]0.81
ObesityNo (n=2,882)2,124(90.7)758(86.1)refref
Yes (n=340)218(9.3)122(13.9)1.57[1.23–1.99]0.00021.45[1.13–1.84]0.003
Co-medications
Beta blockersNo (n=3,141)2,285(97.6)856(97.3)refref
Yes (n=81)57(2.4)24(2.7)1.12[0.66–1.85]0.63
DihydropyridineNo (n=3,117)2,269(96.9)848(96.4)ref
Yes(n=105)73(3.1)32(3.6)1.17[0.74–1.82]0.46
Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitorsNo (n=3,197)2,325(99.3)872(99.1)ref
Yes (n=25)17(0.7)8(0.9)1.25[0.47–3.08]0.59
Angiotensin II receptor blockerNo (n=3,107)2,258(96.4)849(96.5)ref
Yes (n=115)84(3.6)31(3.5)0.98[0.62–1.51]0.93
MetforminNo (n=3,125)2,273(97.1)852(96.8)ref
Yes (n=97)69(2.9)28(3.2)1.08[0.67-1.72]0.72
FenofibrateNo (n=3,203)2,329(99.4)874(99.3)ref
Yes (n=19)13(0.6)6(0.7)1.23[0.38–3.48]0.68
StatinNo (n=3,154)2,290(97.8)864(98.2)ref
Yes (n=68)52(2.2)16(1.8)0.82[0.43–1.46]0.48
COVID-19 status at inclusion
Time between onset of COVID symptoms and admission< 6 days(n=1,599)1,239(52.9)360(40.9)refref
≥ 6 days (n=1,623)1,103(47.1)520(52.1)1.62[1.38–1.90]<0.00011.51[1.28–1.77]<0.0001
NEWS Score 2Low (n=3,017)2,216(94.6)801(91.0)ref
Medium (n=125)89(3.8)36(4.1)1.12[0.75–1.66]0.58
High (n=80)37(1.6)43(4.9)3.22[2.06–5.03]<0.0001
OxygenNo (n=3,034)2,256(96.3)778(88.4)ref
Yes (n=188)86(3.7)102(11.6)3.44[2.52–4.69]<0.00013.13[2.31–4.25]<0.0001
Oxygen saturation (SpO2) %*>94% (n=2,754)1,968(96.1)786(92.4)ref
≤ 94% (n=145)80(3.9)65(7.6)2.03[1.43–2.89]<0.0001
Chest Computed Tomography*
Normal (n=509)370(32.2)139(26.8)ref
Limit (n=756)542(47.1)214(41.3))1.05[0.82-1.35]0.69
Intermediate (n=329)203(17.7)216(24.3)1.65[1.23-2.22]0.001
Severe (n=74)35(3.0)39(7.6))2.97[1.81-4.87]<0.01
C-reactive protein *≤ 5mg/L (n=1,466)1,093(63.2)373(56.1)ref
>5mg/L(n=929)637(36.8)292(43.9)1.34[1.12-1.62]0.001
Neutrophils*≤ 7.5 Giga/L (n=2,604)1,894(97.8)710(96.5)ref
>7.5 Giga/L(n=68)42(2.2)26(3.5)1.65[0.96-2.78]0.046
Eosinophils*≥0.1 Giga/L(n=684)520(26.9)164(22.3)ref
<0.1 Giga/L(n=1,988)1,416(73.1)572(77.7)1.28[1.04-1.58]0.015
Lymphocytes*≥ 1 Giga/L(n=2,370)1,731(89.4)639(86.8)ref
< 1 Giga/L(n=302)205(10.6)97(13.2)1.28[0.98-1.67]0.06
D-Dimer*≤ 0.5 μg/ml(n=335)227(58.7)108(57.8)ref
>0.5μg/ml(n=239)160(41.3)79(42.3)1.04[0.72-1.50]0.84
Fibrinogen*≤ 4g/L(n=290)216(46.2)74(35.2)ref
>4 g/L(n=388)252(53.8)136(64.8)1.58[1.11-2.24]0.008
PCR Ct value < 16 at admission*No (n=2,460)1,773(93.3)687(94.9)ref
Yes (n=164)127(6.7)37(5.1)0.75[0.50–1.11]0.14

NEW Score 2: National Early Warning Score

*Oxygen saturation, Chest Computed Tomography, C-reactive protein, neutrophil, eosinophil, lymphocyte, D-Dimer, Fibrinogen and Ct <16 were not included in the multivariate due to >5% missing data

**only significant results are presented in the multivariate analysis

Risk factors for dyspnoea during the acute phase (n=3,222) NEW Score 2: National Early Warning Score *Oxygen saturation, Chest Computed Tomography, C-reactive protein, neutrophil, eosinophil, lymphocyte, D-Dimer, Fibrinogen and Ct <16 were not included in the multivariate due to >5% missing data **only significant results are presented in the multivariate analysis Among these 496 patients, 123 (24.8%) reported persistent dyspnoea. The duration between the onset of symptoms and the interview was 44.0 ± 10.3 weeks, ranging from 31.6 to 63.1 weeks. Being aged ≥ 45 years old and consulting early during the acute phase (less than six days after the onset of symptoms) were independently associated with persistent dyspnoea (Table 2 ).
Table 2

Risk factors for dyspnoea at follow-up (n=469)

No dyspnoea persistence (n=373)%Dyspnoea persistence (n=123)%Univariate analysisMultivariate analysis**
OR [95%CI] p-valueOR [95%CI] p-value
AgeMean ± SD41.0 ±13.443.6 ± 12.8
Range18–8920–72
< 45 (n=285)226(60.6)59(48.0)ref
≥ 45 (n=211)147(39.4)64(52)1.67(1.08–2.57)0.011.74[1.15–2.63]0.009
SexMale (n=176)138(37.0)38(30.9)ref
Females (n=320)235(63.0)85(69.1)1.31[0.83–2.09]0.22
Chronic conditions
HypertensionNo (n=451)343(92.0)108(87.8)ref
Yes (n=45)30(8.0)15(12.2)1.59[0.76–3.18]0.16
DiabetesNo (n=471)353(94.6)118(95.9)ref
Yes (n=25)20(5.4)5(4.1)0.75[0.21–2.11]0.57
CancerNo (n=483)362(97.1)121(98.4)ref
Yes (n=13)11(2.9)2(1.6)0.54[0.06–2.55]0.43
ObesityNo (n=431)327(87.7)104(84.6)ref
Yes (n=65)46(12.3)19(15.5)1.29[0.69–2.38]0.37
Co-medications
Beta blockersNo (n=486)367(98.4)119(96.8)refref
Yes (n=10)6(1.6)4(3.3)2.05[0.42–8.82]0.26
DihydropyridineNo (n=487)365(97.9)122(99.2)ref
Yes(n=9)8(2.1)1(0.8)0.37[0.008–2.84]0.34
Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitorsNo (n=493)372(99.7)121(98.4)ref
Yes (n=3)1(0.3)2(1.6)6.15[0.31–363.66]0.09
Angiotensin II receptor blockerNo (n=484)364(97.6)120(97.6)ref
Yes (n=12)9(2.4)3(2.4)1.01[0.17–4.14]0.99
MetforminNo (n=487)366(98.1)121(98.4)ref
Yes (n=9)7(1.9)2(1.6)0.86[0.09–4.62]0.86
FenofibrateNo (n=493)371(99.5)122(99.2)ref
Yes (n=3)2(0.5)1(0.8)1.52[0.03–29.42]0.73
COVID-19 status at inclusion
Time between onset of COVID symptoms and admission< 6 days(n=207)146(39.1)61(49.6)refref
≥ 6 days (n=289)227(60.9)62(50.4)0.65[0.42–1.01]0.040.65[0.43–0.99]0.045
NEWS Score 2Low (n=473)357(95.7)116(94.3)ref
Medium (n=13)9(2.4)4(3.3)1.37[0.41–4.52]0.61
High (n=10)7(1.9)3(2.4)1.32[0.33–5.18]0.69
OxygenNo (n=467)353(94.6)114(92.7)ref
Yes (n=29)20(5.4)9(7.3)1.39[0.54–3.31]0.42
Saturation oxygen (SpO2) %> 94% (n=453)335(93.3)118(97.5)ref
≤94% (n=27)24(6.7)3(2.5)0.35[0.07–1.20]0.08
Chest Computed Tomography*Normal (n=74)55(29.9)19(27.9)ref
Limit (n=105)77(41.9)28(41.2)1.05[0.53-2.07]0.88
Intermediate (n=58)40(21.7)18(26.5)1.30[0.61-2.79]0.50
Severe (n=15)12(6.5)3(4.4)0.72[0.18-2.84]0.64
C-reactive protein*≤ 5mg/L (n=219)162(60.0)57(62.6)ref
>5mg/L(n=142)108(40.0)34(37.4)0.89[0.53-1.50]0.66
Neutrophil*≤ 7.5 Giga/L (n=407)300(97.1)107(100.0)ref
>7.5 Giga/L(n=9)9(2.9)0(0.0)0.00[0.00-1.21]0.07
Eosinophil*≥0.1 Giga/L(n=96)82(26.5)14(13.1)ref
<0.1 Giga/L(n=320)227(73.5)93(86.9)2.40[1.27-4.81]0.004
Lymphocyte*≥ 1 Giga/L(n=376)281(90.0)95(88.8)ref
< 1 Giga/L(n=40)28(9.1)12(11.2)1.27[0.56-1.69]0.51
D-Dimer*≤ 0.5 μg/ml(n=71)51(73.9)20(60.6)ref
>0.5μg/ml(n=31)18(26.1)13(39.4)1.84[0.69-4.84]0.17
Fibrinogen*≤ 4g/L(n=36)28(40.6)8(30.8)ref
>4 g/L(n=59)41(59.4)18(69.2)1.54[0.54-4.66]0.38
PCR Ct value < 16 at admission*No (n=396)297(93.7)99(95.2)ref
Yes (n=25)20(6.3)5(4.8)0.75[0.21–2.13]0.57
Viral shedding ≥ 10 days*No (n=285)220(89.8)65(83.3)ref
Yes (n=38)25(10.2)13(11.7)1.76[0.78–3.81]0.12
Hospitalisation ≥ 10 daysNo (n=485)366(98.1)119(97.6)ref
Yes (n=10)7(1.9)3(2.5)1.32[0.22–5.88]0.69
Transfer to the ICUNo (n=485)364(97.6)121(98.4)ref
Yes (n=11)9(2.4)2(1.6)0.69[0.07-3.29]0.61
Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin ≥ 3 daysNo (n= 46)35(9.4)11(8.9)ref
Yes (n= 450)338(90.6)112(01.1)1.05[0.50–2.38]0.88

NEW Score 2: National Early Warning Score

*Chest Computed Tomography, C-reactive protein, neutrophil, eosinophil, lymphocytes, D-Dimer, Fibrinogen, Ct < 16 and viral shedding were not included in the multivariate due to >5% missing data

**only significant results are presented in the multivariate analysis

Risk factors for dyspnoea at follow-up (n=469) NEW Score 2: National Early Warning Score *Chest Computed Tomography, C-reactive protein, neutrophil, eosinophil, lymphocytes, D-Dimer, Fibrinogen, Ct < 16 and viral shedding were not included in the multivariate due to >5% missing data **only significant results are presented in the multivariate analysis Lung damage in COVID-19 patients could be explained by various underlying mechanisms, including viral and immune-mediated implications (Liu ), which could cause the persistence of dyspnoea. Dyspnoea is, by nature, a highly subjective experience. Women are more prone to suffer dyspnoea, possibly due to a decreased surface area for pulmonary gas exchange relative to lung size-matched men (Cory ). People who are obese have a decreased functional residual capacity and expiration reserve volume (Parameswaran ). Therefore, it is not surprising that female and obese COVID-19 patients had a higher risk for dyspnoea at admission. We observed that dyspnoea was more frequent in patients consulting more than six days after the onset of symptoms, suggesting that it takes a few days for the virus to provoke such symptoms. The association with a high viral load upon admission suggests a direct cytopathic effect of viruses on lung tissue. The association of symptom persistence with being older may suggest a lower capacity of cell regeneration due to ageing. We have no hypothesis, however, to explain why early consultation was associated with the persistence of dyspnoea. The use of the telephone interview has some limitations, including the lack of respiratory functional tests to quantify dyspnoea levels and a lack of information about smoking status. In addition, patients lost to follow-up could potentially include a high proportion of patients who fully recovered their respiratory function. Despites these limitations, our study underlined the high prevalence of the persistence of dyspnoea (24.8%) in COVID-19 patients and its association with older age. Further investigation with a clinical evaluation of respiratory function over time is required in these patients.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Comité de Protection des Personnes Nord Ouest II (No. 2021-A01183-33) on 22/07/2021.

Consent for publication

All authors gave their consent for publication.

Availability of data and materials

All the data for this study will be made available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.

Declaration of interests

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Funding

None declared.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Author contributions

Philippe Gautret and Didier Raoult devised the project, the main conceptual ideas. Nhu Ngoc Nguyen, Jean Christophe Lagier, Matthieu Million, Thi Loi Dao, Line Meddeb collected the data. Van Tuan Hoang and Nhu Ngoc Nguyen analyzed and interpreted data. Nhu Ngoc Nguyen and Philippe Gautret wrote the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript. Philippe Gautret is the guarantor for this work.

Acknowledgements

Our thanks go to Yolande Obadia and all the doctors who volunteered to recruit patients by telephone interview at the Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire (IHU) Méditerranée Infection, including Pierre Bares, Robert Barrus, Souad Benali, Marc Benoit, Dominique Blanc, Christine Carissimi, Denis Charpin, Jean Delmont, Patricia Enel, Charbelle Ezzedine, Pascale Fournier, Marguerite François, Katell Guillon, Guy Marmottant, Marie-Christine Manca-Pelissier, Isabelle Pinot, Nicole Quintana Benyahya, Robert Loi, Dominique Ricci Cagnol, Nicole Sarles-Philip, Catherine Tamalet, Jean-Michel Vassault, Marie-Pierre Vergobbi, and Nicole Veschi.
  3 in total

1.  Sex differences in the intensity and qualitative dimensions of exertional dyspnea in physically active young adults.

Authors:  Julia M Cory; Michele R Schaeffer; Sabrina S Wilkie; Andrew H Ramsook; Joseph H Puyat; Brandon Arbour; Robbi Basran; Michael Lam; Christian Les; Benjamin MacDonald; Dennis Jensen; Jordan A Guenette
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2015-09-03

2.  Outcomes of 3,737 COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin and other regimens in Marseille, France: A retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Jean-Christophe Lagier; Matthieu Million; Philippe Gautret; Philippe Colson; Sébastien Cortaredona; Audrey Giraud-Gatineau; Stéphane Honoré; Jean-Yves Gaubert; Pierre-Edouard Fournier; Hervé Tissot-Dupont; Eric Chabrière; Andreas Stein; Jean-Claude Deharo; Florence Fenollar; Jean-Marc Rolain; Yolande Obadia; Alexis Jacquier; Bernard La Scola; Philippe Brouqui; Michel Drancourt; Philippe Parola; Didier Raoult
Journal:  Travel Med Infect Dis       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 6.211

Review 3.  Overlapping and discrete aspects of the pathology and pathogenesis of the emerging human pathogenic coronaviruses SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and 2019-nCoV.

Authors:  Jia Liu; Xin Zheng; Qiaoxia Tong; Wei Li; Baoju Wang; Kathrin Sutter; Mirko Trilling; Mengji Lu; Ulf Dittmer; Dongliang Yang
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 2.327

  3 in total
  1 in total

1.  Assessing the impact of COVID-19 at 1-year using the SF-12 questionnaire: Data from the Anticipate longitudinal cohort study.

Authors:  Brendan O'Kelly; Louise Vidal; Gordana Avramovic; John Broughan; Stephen Peter Connolly; Aoife G Cotter; Walter Cullen; Shannon Glaspy; Tina McHugh; James Woo; John S Lambert
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 12.074

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.