3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
4 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Intrapulmonary shunting is a key contributor to hypoxia in COVID-19: An update on the pathophysiology

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The pathophysiology of COVID-19 remains poorly understood. We aimed to estimate the contribution of intrapulmonary shunting and ventilation-to-perfusion (V A/Q) mismatch using a mathematical model to construct oxygen-haemoglobin dissociation curves (ODCs).

          Methods

          ODCs were constructed using transcutaneous pulse oximetry at two different fractions of inspired oxygen (FiO 2). 199 patients were included from two large district general hospitals in the South East of England from 1 st to 14 th January 2021. The study was supported by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network.

          Results

          Overall mortality was 29%. Mean age was 68.2 years (SEM 1·2) with 46% female. Median shunt on admission was 17% (IQR 8–24.5); V A/Q was 0.61 (IQR 0.52–0.73). Shunt was 37.5% higher in deaths (median 22%, IQR 9–29) compared to survivors (16%, 8–21; p = 0.0088) and was a predictor of mortality (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01–1.07). Admission oxygen saturations were more strongly predictive of mortality (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87–0.96). There was no difference in V A/Q mismatch between deaths (0.60; IQR 0.50–0.73) and survivors (0.61; IQR 0.52–0.73; p = 0.63) and it was not predictive of mortality (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.18–2.52; p = 0.55). Shunt negatively correlated with admission oxygen saturation (R -0.533; p<0.0001) whereas V A/Q was not (R 0.1137; p = 0.12).

          Interpretation

          Shunt, not V A/Q mismatch, was associated with worsening hypoxia, though calculating shunt was not of prognostic value. This study adds to our understanding of the pathophysiology of hypoxaemia in COVID-19. Our inexpensive and reliable technique may provide further insights into the pathophysiology of hypoxia in other respiratory diseases.

          Related collections

          Most cited references22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study

          Summary Background Since December, 2019, Wuhan, China, has experienced an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 have been reported but risk factors for mortality and a detailed clinical course of illness, including viral shedding, have not been well described. Methods In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study, we included all adult inpatients (≥18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from Jinyintan Hospital and Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital (Wuhan, China) who had been discharged or had died by Jan 31, 2020. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and laboratory data, including serial samples for viral RNA detection, were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between survivors and non-survivors. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression methods to explore the risk factors associated with in-hospital death. Findings 191 patients (135 from Jinyintan Hospital and 56 from Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital) were included in this study, of whom 137 were discharged and 54 died in hospital. 91 (48%) patients had a comorbidity, with hypertension being the most common (58 [30%] patients), followed by diabetes (36 [19%] patients) and coronary heart disease (15 [8%] patients). Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital death associated with older age (odds ratio 1·10, 95% CI 1·03–1·17, per year increase; p=0·0043), higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (5·65, 2·61–12·23; p<0·0001), and d-dimer greater than 1 μg/mL (18·42, 2·64–128·55; p=0·0033) on admission. Median duration of viral shedding was 20·0 days (IQR 17·0–24·0) in survivors, but SARS-CoV-2 was detectable until death in non-survivors. The longest observed duration of viral shedding in survivors was 37 days. Interpretation The potential risk factors of older age, high SOFA score, and d-dimer greater than 1 μg/mL could help clinicians to identify patients with poor prognosis at an early stage. Prolonged viral shedding provides the rationale for a strategy of isolation of infected patients and optimal antiviral interventions in the future. Funding Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences; National Science Grant for Distinguished Young Scholars; National Key Research and Development Program of China; The Beijing Science and Technology Project; and Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19 — Preliminary Report

            Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and thereby reduce progression to respiratory failure and death. Methods In this controlled, open-label trial comparing a range of possible treatments in patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19, we randomly assigned patients to receive oral or intravenous dexamethasone (at a dose of 6 mg once daily) for up to 10 days or to receive usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Here, we report the preliminary results of this comparison. Results A total of 2104 patients were assigned to receive dexamethasone and 4321 to receive usual care. Overall, 482 patients (22.9%) in the dexamethasone group and 1110 patients (25.7%) in the usual care group died within 28 days after randomization (age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.93; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute between-group differences in mortality varied considerably according to the level of respiratory support that the patients were receiving at the time of randomization. In the dexamethasone group, the incidence of death was lower than that in the usual care group among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.3% vs. 41.4%; rate ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.81) and among those receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (23.3% vs. 26.2%; rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94) but not among those who were receiving no respiratory support at randomization (17.8% vs. 14.0%; rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.55). Conclusions In patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the use of dexamethasone resulted in lower 28-day mortality among those who were receiving either invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen alone at randomization but not among those receiving no respiratory support. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research and others; RECOVERY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04381936; ISRCTN number, 50189673.)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

              Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; p interaction =0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. Funding UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: SoftwareRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: InvestigationRole: Project administrationRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS One
                plos
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                20 October 2022
                2022
                20 October 2022
                : 17
                : 10
                : e0273402
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, Surrey, United Kingdom
                [2 ] Epsom & St Helier NHS Foundation Trust, Epsom, United Kingdom
                [3 ] University College London, London, United Kingdom
                [4 ] Lister Hospital, East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, Stevenage, United Kingdom
                [5 ] Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
                [6 ] King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
                [7 ] University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom
                Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, IRELAND
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: ASJC is an employee of Synoptic (funder). All other authors report no conflicts of interest.

                ‡ These authors are joint last authors on this work. TD and DR-J also contributed equally to this work

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2681-2501
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8184-7208
                Article
                PONE-D-22-14285
                10.1371/journal.pone.0273402
                9584408
                36264932
                68e05ca2-7612-4b5b-8df0-9589cd2b39cf
                © 2022 Mayor et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 16 May 2022
                : 8 August 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Pages: 11
                Funding
                Funded by: Synoptic
                This is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio study (CPMS ID: 48396) which received a grant from Synoptic, a data intelligence company specialising in health care data security (a subsidiary company of https://infinite.software). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Physical Sciences
                Chemistry
                Chemical Elements
                Oxygen
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Viral Diseases
                Covid 19
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Pulmonology
                Medical Hypoxia
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Health Care Facilities
                Hospitals
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Oncology
                Cancer Treatment
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Immunology
                Immune Response
                Inflammation
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Immunology
                Immune Response
                Inflammation
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Clinical Medicine
                Signs and Symptoms
                Inflammation
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Pharmaceutics
                Drug Therapy
                Steroid Therapy
                Corticosteroid Therapy
                Custom metadata
                All de-identified study data are available from figshare at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.20553234.v1.
                COVID-19

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article