Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome for Anesthesiologists: A Narrative Review and a Pragmatic Approach to Clinical Care

The negative effects of long COVID-19 on cardiovascular health and implications for the presurgical examination

CONTEXT

In 2019, emergence of the novel and communicable severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection took scientific communities by surprise and imposed significant burden on healthcare systems globally. Although the advent of this disease piqued the interest of academic centers, healthcare systems, and the general public, there is still much yet to be elucidated regarding epidemiology, pathophysiology, and long-term impacts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has been established that long COVID-19 can impact multiple organ systems, including the cardiovascular system, unfavorably. Although the pathophysiology of this damage is not well understood, adverse sequelae may range from chest pain and arrhythmias to heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction, or sudden cardiac death. For any postacute COVID-19 patient requiring a surgical procedure, the potential for cardiac injury secondary to long COVID-19 must be considered in the preoperative cardiac examination.

OBJECTIVES

This literature review serves to add to the growing body of literature exploring postacute cardiovascular outcomes of COVID-19, with a focus on presurgical cardiac clearance in the adult patient. Specifically, this review studies the prevalence of cardiovascular symptomatology including chest pain, arrhythmias, blood pressure changes, myo-/pericarditis, HF, cardiomyopathy, orthostatic intolerance, and thromboembolism. Although current evidence is scarce in both quality and quantity, it is the goal that this review will highlight the negative impacts of long COVID-19 on cardiovascular health and encourage providers to be cognizant of potential sequelae in the context of the presurgical examination.

METHODS

For this study, peer-reviewed and journal-published articles were selected based on established inclusion and exclusion criteria to address the question "How does long COVID-19 impact the presurgical cardiac examination of an adult scheduled to undergo a noncardiac procedure?" Inclusion criteria included human studies conducted in adult patients and published in peer-reviewed journals up until May 2024 examining the effects of long-COVID-19 infection on the cardiovascular system. Exclusion criteria eliminated unpublished reports, preprints, duplicate articles, literature regarding coronavirus strains other than COVID-19, studies regarding post-COVID-19 vaccination complications, animal studies, and studies conducted in people younger than 18 years of age. A total of 6,675 studies were retrieved from PubMed and Google Scholar. Following screening, 60 studies were included in final consideration.

RESULTS

Cardiovascular symptoms of postacute COVID-19 infection were encountered with the following percentages prevalence (total numbers of articles mentioning symptom/total number of articles [60]): chest pain (83.3), arrhythmias (88.3), hypertension (40.0), hypotension (16.7), myocarditis (80.0), pericarditis (51.7), HF (70.0), cardiomyopathy (55.0), orthostatic intolerance (56.7), and thromboembolic events (85.0).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of persisting COVID symptoms may negatively impact the patient's physical examination, blood tests, electrocardiogram (ECG), imaging, and/or echocardiogram. Cardiac conditions associated with long COVID require special attention in the context of the presurgical candidate due to an increased risk of sudden cardiac death, myocarditis, stroke, and myocardial infarction - even in those who were healthy prior to acute COVID-19 infection. Until more specific scientific evidence comes to light, care of these patients should be viewed through the prism of the best practices already in use and clinicians should maintain a low threshold to pursue more extensive cardiac workup prior to surgery.

Can Laryngeal Mask Airway be the First Choice for Tracheal Stenosis Surgery? A Historical Cohort Study

Objectives

To compare the usage of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and orotracheal intubation (OTI), which are separate airway management methods in tracheal reconstruction surgeries, in terms of perioperative management, mortality, and morbidity.

Methods

Adult patients who underwent tracheal reconstruction surgery between June 2020 and June 2022 were included in the study, retrospectively. Patients with lost data or primary tracheal malignancy were excluded. Patients who underwent tracheal reconstruction were divided into two groups: LMA and OTI.

Results

Of a total of 57 included patients, the OTI and LMA groups had 30 (52.63%) and 27 patients (47.37%), respectively. The rate of intubated transfer to the intensive care unit and the length of stay in the intensive care unit were significantly higher in the OTI group (p=0. 014, p=0. 031) than those of the LMA group; further, in tracheal cultures, reproduction was also significantly higher in the OTI group (23.33%) (p=0. 007). The postoperative mortality rates were similar in both groups.

Conclusion

Since the absence of tension in end-to-end anastomosis of the trachea is vital for successful surgery, the LMA application (which has no tracheal contact) can be considered superior to OTI. In this study, LMA was successfully applied in all patients. Considering that the aim of anesthesia management should be to provide adequate oxygenation and normocarbia with minimally invasive intervention, we suggest airway management using LMA as the first option for tracheal reconstruction surgery because of the advantages described in this study.

Constitution of Long COVID illness, patienthood and recovery: a critical synthesis of qualitative studies

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the lived experiences of Long COVID.

DESIGN

Critical interpretive synthesis of qualitative research.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched on 14 September 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Original peer-reviewed qualitative studies describing the experiences of Long COVID were eligible for inclusion.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We used established qualitative synthesis methods to search, screen and manually code the included studies. Critical interpretation methods were used to analyse the data and develop synthetic constructs.

RESULTS

68 articles were identified in the first phase of sampling, with 16 studies and 879 participants included in the final synthesis. The analysis of these studies was organised into three thematic constructions of Long COVID: (1) the illness, (2) the patient and (3) recovery. Long COVID was diversely characterised across study approaches, designs and findings but was underpinned by shared diagnostic logics, which shaped the identification and measurement of symptoms. The boundaries between different constitutions of Long COVID in qualitative accounts of illness experience were often imprecise. Slippages between different definitions of Long COVID had implications for patient experiences in relation to diagnosis, help-seeking and care, and expectations of recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Long COVID is a site of multiple and diverse qualitative interpretation. Accounts of lived experience emphasise the constitutions of illness, patienthood and recovery as situated and emergent. The ongoing context-based negotiation of Long COVID is a defining qualitative feature of the condition. Approaches to researching, diagnosing and developing health interventions must be as adaptive as the varieties of Long COVID lived experience.

Brain Fog: a Narrative Review of the Most Common Mysterious Cognitive Disorder in COVID-19

It has been more than three years since COVID-19 impacted the lives of millions of people, many of whom suffer from long-term effects known as long-haulers. Notwithstanding multiorgan complaints in long-haulers, signs and symptoms associated with cognitive characteristics commonly known as "brain fog" occur in COVID patients over 50, women, obesity, and asthma at excessive. Brain fog is a set of symptoms that include cognitive impairment, inability to concentrate and multitask, and short-term and long-term memory loss. Of course, brain fog contributes to high levels of anxiety and stress, necessitating an empathetic response to this group of COVID patients. Although the etiology of brain fog in COVID-19 is currently unknown, regarding the mechanisms of pathogenesis, the following hypotheses exist: activation of astrocytes and microglia to release pro-inflammatory cytokines, aggregation of tau protein, and COVID-19 entry in the brain can trigger an autoimmune reaction. There are currently no specific tests to detect brain fog or any specific cognitive rehabilitation methods. However, a healthy lifestyle can help reduce symptoms to some extent, and symptom-based clinical management is also well suited to minimize brain fog side effects in COVID-19 patients. Therefore, this review discusses mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis that may contribute to brain fog, as well as some approaches to providing therapies that may help COVID-19 patients avoid annoying brain fog symptoms.

Influenza transmissibility among patients and health-care professionals in a geriatric short-stay unit using individual contact data

Detailed information are lacking on influenza transmissibility in hospital although clusters are regularly reported. In this pilot study, our goal was to estimate the transmission rate of H3N2 2012-influenza, among patients and health care professionals in a short-term Acute Care for the Elderly Unit by using a stochastic approach and a simple susceptible-exposed-infectious-removed model. Transmission parameters were derived from documented individual contact data collected by Radio Frequency IDentification technology at the epidemic peak. From our model, nurses appeared to transmit infection to a patient more frequently with a transmission rate of 1.04 per day on average compared to 0.38 from medical doctors. This transmission rate was 0.34 between nurses. These results, even obtained in this specific context, might give a relevant insight of the influenza dynamics in hospitals and will help to improve and to target control measures for preventing nosocomial transmission of influenza. The investigation of nosocomial transmission of SARS-COV-2 might gain from similar approaches.

Does COVID-19 related symptomatology indicate a transdiagnostic neuropsychiatric disorder? - Multidisciplinary implications

The clinical presentation that emerges from the extensive coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mental health literature suggests high correlations among many conventional psychiatric diagnoses. Arguments against the use of multiple comorbidities for a single patient have been published long before the pandemic. Concurrently, diagnostic recommendations for use of transdiagnostic considerations for improved treatment have been also published in recent years. In this review, we pose the question of whether a transdiagnostic mental health disease, including psychiatric and neuropsychiatric symptomology, has emerged since the onset of the pandemic. There are many attempts to identify a syndrome related to the pandemic, but none of the validated scales is able to capture the entire psychiatric and neuropsychiatric clinical presentation in infected and non-infected individuals. These scales also only marginally touch the issue of etiology and prevalence. We suggest a working hypothesis termed Complex Stress Reaction Syndrome (CSRS) representing a global psychiatric reaction to the pandemic situation in the general population (Type A) and a neuropsychiatric reaction in infected individuals (Type B) which relates to neurocognitive and psychiatric features which are part (excluding systemic and metabolic dysfunctions) of the syndrome termed in the literature as long COVID. We base our propositions on multidisciplinary scientific data regarding mental health during the global pandemic situation and the effects of viral infection reviewed from Google Scholar and PubMed between February 1, 2022 and March 10, 2022. Search in-clusion criteria were "mental health", "COVID-19" and "Long COVID", English language and human studies only. We suggest that this more comprehensive way of understanding COVID-19 complex mental health reactions may promote better prevention and treatment and serve to guide implementation of recommended administrative regulations that were recently published by the World Psychiatric Association. This review may serve as a call for an international investigation of our working hypothesis.

The COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences for chronic pain: a narrative review

The COVID-19 pandemic transformed everyday life, but the implications were most impactful for vulnerable populations, including patients with chronic pain. Moreover, persistent pain is increasingly recognised as a key manifestation of long COVID. This narrative review explores the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic for chronic pain. Publications were identified related to the COVID-19 pandemic influence on the burden of chronic pain, development of new-onset pain because of long COVID with proposed mechanisms and COVID-19 vaccines and pain interventions. Broadly, mechanisms underlying pain due to SARS-CoV-2 infection could be caused by 'systemic inflammatory-immune mechanisms', 'direct neuropathic mechanisms' or 'secondary mechanisms due to the viral infection or treatment'. Existing chronic pain populations were variably impacted and social determinants of health appeared to influence the degree of effect. SARS-CoV-2 infection increased the absolute numbers of patients with pain and headache. In the acute phase, headache as a presenting symptom predicted a milder course. New-onset chronic pain was reportedly common and likely involves multiple mechanisms; however, its prevalence decreases over time and symptoms appear to fluctuate. Patients requiring intensive support were particularly susceptible to long COVID symptoms. Some evidence suggests steroid exposure (often used for pain interventions) may affect vaccine efficacy, but there is no evidence of clinical repercussions to date. Although existing chronic pain management could help with symptomatic relief, there is a need to advance research focusing on mechanism-based treatments within the domain of multidisciplinary care.

Post-COVID-19 Syndrome: Involvement and Interactions between Respiratory, Cardiovascular and Nervous Systems

Though the acute effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection have been extensively reported, the long-term effects are less well described. Specifically, while clinicians endure to battle COVID-19, we also need to develop broad strategies to manage post-COVID-19 symptoms and encourage those affected to seek suitable care. This review addresses the possible involvement of the lung, heart and brain in post-viral syndromes and describes suggested management of post-COVID-19 syndrome. Post-COVID-19 respiratory manifestations comprise coughing and shortness of breath. Furthermore, arrhythmias, palpitations, hypotension, increased heart rate, venous thromboembolic diseases, myocarditis and acute heart failure are usual cardiovascular events. Among neurological manifestations, headache, peripheral neuropathy symptoms, memory issues, lack of concentration and sleep disorders are most commonly observed with varying frequencies. Finally, mental health issues affecting mental abilities and mood fluctuations, namely anxiety and depression, are frequently seen. Finally, long COVID is a complex syndrome with protracted heterogeneous symptoms, and patients who experience post-COVID-19 sequelae require personalized treatment as well as ongoing support.