The present study analysed a multicentre cohort of patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19. Few data are currently available on the follow-up of survivor patients with COVID-19 after discharge. Interestingly, we found that more than 70% of patients discharged from the ICU had persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms after three months passed since hospital discharge; however, the hospital re-admission rate within this period remained low and only 15% needed to visit the emergency department. There was also a poor correlation between abnormal radiologic findings and persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms in critically ill patients after three months passed since hospital discharge. Factors associated with persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms included female sex, duration of ICU stay, and the onset of ICUAP.
With respect to the burden of follow-up on the healthcare system, x-rays and CT scans were performed in 4 of 10 ICU-admitted patients after three months since hospital discharge. As expected, normal x-rays were frequent in patients with good clinical resolution; interstitial patterns were more often seen in chest CT scans of patients with persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms. Recently, patients with previously undiagnosed fibrotic lung abnormalities have been reported to face the possibility of ARDS onset [19]. In a cohort of 114 survivors of severe COVID-19 monitored for six months, chest CT scans revealed fibrotic-like changes in the lungs in more than one-third of cases [20]. In contrast, only 2.5% of our cohort presented with an interstitial lung pattern. In our view, an important issue is to determine patients’ need for resources after hospital discharge. More than 15% of our cohort patients discharged from the ICU required oxygen; yet at the time of writing this manuscript, only a minority (5%) continued receiving supplementary oxygen at home. Interestingly, nebulizers were less frequently used than supplementary oxygen after hospital discharge. To the best of our knowledge, this is a novel finding. Few data are, however, available regarding additional therapy in patients with COVID-19 discharged from the ICU; this is a point that warrants further exploration. Investigators Banerjee et al. [21] followed 621 discharged patients receiving oxygen at home and reported a 30-day hospital re-admission rate of 8.5%. Readmission rate in our cohort was much lower than that in that study (3.1%), although more patients (15%) visited the emergency department after discharge.
The symptoms most frequently observed in patients with post-COVID-19 included dyspnoea, asthenia, and weakness. After analysis of the therapy provided, we found that oxygen therapy was provided significantly more often to patients with persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms. In a previous study in China, patients monitored for three months after hospital discharge presented with considerable radiologic and physiologic abnormalities [22]. In another Chinese study[23] including over 1000 patients, survivors of COVID-19 presented with fatigue, sleep difficulties and anxiety or depression at 6-month follow-up. However, as in the previous study, no detailed data about the functional status of the patients were provided. In our study, we did not perform any analysis related to depression or anxiety.
A strength of our research includes the prospective follow-up of a detailed list of lung function parameters. Soriano et al. [24] recently wrote an editorial suggesting more studies be done in clinical research assessing the post-COVID-19 condition. Our study integrates an extremely sizeable cohort and evaluates a relevant subgroup of the population, i.e., critically ill patients. A French study found that patients with COVID-19 had some symptoms not previously present before their disease[25]. These findings can complement our report, as most of the patients included in our cohort had a critically ill condition. Moreover, in our cohort, ICU-admitted patients with no clinical resolution had worse forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) than those who did not present with persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms. Some studies—the majority from China and some from Europe, with limited patient samples—have also found substantial differences in LFT; however, most patients included were not critically ill [26][27]. In addition to FEV1, FEV1/FVC and DLCO presented significant differences. In a study done in Sweden, investigators Ekbom et al. [28] found that over half of patients with COVID-19 treated in the ICU had impaired lung function during follow-up, suggesting further follow-up studies including DLCO. In their cohort, a mean DLCO of 62% was reported as predicted amongst those with abnormal DLCO. These figures are like ours. We observed a significant correlation between abnormal DLCO and poor health post-COVID-19 in our cohort. The presence of decreased DLCO might reflect microvascular or alveolar capillary damage and be expected in patients with no clinical resolution[29]. Very little is known about the pathophysiology of poor health post-COVID-19. COVID-19 causes lung damage due to a marked inflammatory response to the virus. As is known, the disease may damage endothelial cells in the lung parenchyma. Therefore, identifying pathways may prove as a key point in determining this damage. Ward et al. [30] found that increased plasma levels of von Willebrand factor antigen (VWF:Ag) and pro-coagulant factor VIII (FVIII) were seen in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. In our cohort, we found only elevated levels of fibrinogen in patients with persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms; this observation could help determine the role of endothelial activation in pathophysiology of the disease.
Additionally, we aimed to determine an association between ventilatory parameters in patients with invasive mechanical ventilation and persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms at the 3-month follow-up since hospital discharge. Our assessment of different respiratory parameters such as PaO2/FiO2 ratio and pCO2 showed a significant correlation across two variables: compliance at the time of intubation and PCO2 at day 3. Both parameters clearly reflect the damage caused to the respiratory system by a COVID-19 infection. It is interesting that compliance, albeit not the PaO2/FiO2 ratio, was a predictor of persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms. A recent study found that median time to intubation was twice as long in the very-low compliance group than in the low-normal compliance group [31]. Reported higher levels of PaCO2 in patients in the very-low lung compliance group in that study correlated strongly with our findings. Furthermore, some authors [32] have suggested that compliance in COVID-19-related ARDS is higher in non-COVID-19-related ARDS; our finding could find explanation by the fact that patients with low compliance were those with more severe ARDS. Recently, Gonzalez et al. found that abnormal results were present in CT scans of more than two-thirds of patients with COVID-19-related ARDS[33].
The last and perhaps most important finding of our study is the identification of independent risk factors for persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms.
The first risk factor is female sex. This is an intriguing finding, given that male patients are more widely reported to be admitted to the ICU[34][35] for COVID-19. Further, a systematic review found that COVID-19 may be associated with worse outcomes in males than in females [36]. Whilst most ICU-admitted patients in our cohort were male (67%), more female patients had persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms at 3-month follow-up. The PHOSP-COVID study conducted in the United Kingdom observed that 70% had not fully recovered a mean follow-up period of five months after hospital discharge, with women being more than men [37].
In addition to female patients, another group who presented with poor recovery included critically ill patients with a longer duration of ICU stay. After applying for adjustment, we found that tracheostomy was not an independent risk factor for poor recovery. This finding challenges the recommendation that early tracheostomy may reduce recovery time in critical COVID-19[38].
Lastly, the onset of pneumonia during the ICU stay proved to be an independent risk factor fat 3-month follow-up. This is a very especially important finding given the high incidence of nosocomial pneumonia in critically ill patients, especially than those that needed invasive mechanical ventilation. This finding stresses the importance of the prevention ICUAP in COVID-19 critically ill patients. The hypothesis behind this finding is that a second hit (ICUAP) after COVID-19 increased lung damage and consequently increased the risk of respiratory symptoms persistence at follow-up. Some multicentre, European manuscripts suggest that ventilator-associated lower respiratory tract infections (VA-LRTI) were more frequent in patients with COVID-19 than in patients admitted to the ICU with another virus (influenza) or in patients without viral infections [39]. To the best of our knowledge, our finding has not been reported elsewhere, and other studies should be carried out to confirm or refute it.
Our study has several limitations. Samples obtained from the centres may not be representative, given that hospital units selected all had the research resources necessary to participate. We included an acceptable number of variables for follow-up analysis; however, certain functional tests were not recorded, including the six-minute walk test (6MWT), an excellent tool for assessing sub-maximal exercise aerobic capacity and endurance. We preferred to determine LFT and imaging, as detailed extensively in this manuscript, and felt that the 6MWT might not be reproducible as a measure for oxygen desaturation. A strength of this manuscript is the availability of many data points from the acute period and including data of day 1 and day 3 to determine risk factors of Long-Covid 19 syndrome.