Two-year multidisciplinary follow-up of COVID-19 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive respiratory support
- PMID: 37021472
- DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4806.22.08397-5
Two-year multidisciplinary follow-up of COVID-19 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive respiratory support
Abstract
Background: COVID-19 patients frequently develop respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. Data on long-term survival of patients who had severe COVID-19 are insufficient. We assessed and compared two-year survival, CT imaging, quality of life, and functional recovery of COVID-19 ARDS patients requiring respiratory support with invasive (IMV) versus noninvasive ventilation (NIV).
Methods: Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted up to May 28th, 2020, who required IMV or NIV, and survived to hospital discharge were enrolled. Patients were contacted two years after discharge to assess vital status, functional, psychological, and cognitive outcomes using validated scales. Patients with persistent respiratory symptoms or high burden of residual lung damage at previous CT scan received a two-year chest CT scan.
Results: Out of 61 IMV survivors, 98% were alive at two-year follow-up, and 52 completed the questionnaire. Out of 82 survivors receiving NIV only, 94% were alive at two years, and 47 completed the questionnaire. We found no major differences between invasively and noninvasively ventilated patients, with overall acceptable functional recovery. Among the 99 patients completing the questionnaire, 23 have more than moderate exertional dyspnea. Chest CT scans showed that 4 patients (all received IMV) had fibrotic-like changes.
Conclusions: Patients who received mechanical ventilation due to COVID-19 and were discharged from hospital had a 96% survival rate at the two-year follow-up. There was no difference in overall recovery and quality of life between patients who did and did not require IMV, although respiratory morbidity remains high.
Similar articles
-
One-Year Multidisciplinary Follow-Up of Patients With COVID-19 Requiring Invasive Mechanical Ventilation.J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2022 May;36(5):1354-1363. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2021.11.032. Epub 2021 Nov 27. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2022. PMID: 34973891 Free PMC article.
-
Outcomes of Noninvasive and Invasive Ventilation in Patients Hospitalized with Asthma Exacerbation.Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016 Jul;13(7):1096-104. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201510-701OC. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016. PMID: 27070493 Free PMC article.
-
Two-months quality of life of COVID-19 invasively ventilated survivors; an Italian single-center study.Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2021 Aug;65(7):912-920. doi: 10.1111/aas.13812. Epub 2021 Mar 15. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2021. PMID: 33655487 Free PMC article.
-
High-flow nasal cannula versus noninvasive ventilation in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Ther Adv Respir Dis. 2022 Jan-Dec;16:17534666221087847. doi: 10.1177/17534666221087847. Ther Adv Respir Dis. 2022. PMID: 35318888 Free PMC article.
-
Correlation of important prognostic factors and CT scores in invasive and non-invasive ventilation of COVID-19 patients.Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2023 Feb;29(2):163-168. doi: 10.14744/tjtes.2022.92770. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2023. PMID: 36748772 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical