Exercise capacity-impairment after COVID-19 pneumonia is mainly caused by deconditioning

[Dyspnea in post-COVID-19 patients: A review]

New coronavirus infection may lead to long-term consequences, particularly to post-COVID syndrome, one of the most common manifestations of which is dyspnea. Post-COVID-19 shortness of breath may persist from one to several months and even years that results in low quality of life of patients. The review highlights possible risk factors and causes of dyspnea in post-COVID period such as lung damage, cardiovascular pathology, hyperventilation syndrome, dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system, detraining, anemia, etc. The authors present data about COVID-19-associated causes of dyspnea and severity of acute COVID-19. The review emphasizes the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to the diagnosis and treatment of patients with shortness of breath in post-COVID-19 period.

Determinants of cardiorespiratory fitness measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing in COVID-19 survivors: a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta‑regression

BACKGROUND

The relationship between cardiorespiratory fitness and its possible determinants in post-COVID-19 survivors has not been systematically assessed.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and summarize studies comparing cardiorespiratory fitness measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing in COVID-19 survivors versus non-COVID-19 controls, as well as to determine the influence of potential moderating factors.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and SciELO since their inceptions until June 2022. Mean differences (MD), standard mean differences (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were used to evaluate potential moderating factors.

RESULTS

48 studies (3372 participants, mean age 42 years, and with a mean testing time of 4 months post-COVID-19) were included, comprising a total of 1823 COVID-19 survivors and 1549 non-COVID-19 controls. After data pooling, VO2 peak (SMD=1.0 95% CI: 0.5, 1.5; 17 studies; N = 1273) was impaired in COVID-19 survivors. In 15 studies that reported VO2 peak values in mL/min/kg, non-COVID-19 controls had higher peak VO2 values than COVID-19 survivors (MD=6.2, 95% CI: 3.5, 8.8; N = 905; I2=84%). In addition, VO2 peak was associated with age, time post-COVID-19, disease severity, presence of dyspnea, and reduced exercise capacity.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review provides evidence that cardiorespiratory fitness may be impaired in COVID-19 survivors, especially for those with severe disease, presence of dyspnea, and reduced exercise capacity. Furthermore, the degree of reduction of VO2 peak is inversely associated with age and time post-COVID.

Effect of Home-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation on Pulmonary Fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary fibrosis is a chronic, progressive lung condition that involves lung tissue scarring and thickening. The effects of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in post-covid pulmonary fibrosis (PCPF) and other forms of fibrosis together have not been evaluated. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation on pulmonary function, functional capacity, and health-related quality of life in people with pulmonary fibrosis (post-COVID pulmonary fibrosis, pulmonary fibrosis secondary to pulmonary tuberculosis (TB), pulmonary fibrosis secondary to interstitial lung disease (ILD), pulmonary fibrosis secondary to bronchiectasis).

METHODS

A single-group pretest-posttest experimental study was performed after recruiting 98 pulmonary fibrosis subjects from K.M.C hospitals. After being screened for the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 45 subjects were analyzed, and 6 subjects were lost to follow-up.  A home-based pulmonary rehabilitation program was carried out for 8 weeks (warm-up, stretching exercises, aerobic exercise, strength training for upper limb and lower limb, breathing exercises mainly involved; others: energy saving techniques, controlled coughing techniques, dyspnea relieving positions). The program was supervised via weekly phone calls. Pulmonary function (Pulmonary function test), exercise capacity (6-minute walk test), dyspnea (modified Borg scale), and health-related quality of life (SF-36) were evaluated before and after the intervention. During the enrollment and after the 6-minute walk test, saturation of peripheral oxygen (SPO2) level was also evaluated pre-intervention and after the 8-weeks program.

RESULTS

Pulmonary function [FVC(L) t = -12.52, p<0.05; FEV1(L) t = -2.56, p<0.05; FEV1/FVC t = 7.98, p<0.05 and DLCO (ml/min/mmHg) t = -5.13, p<0.05], 6MWD [MD 88.66; p<0.05] and HRQOL measured by SF-36 scores (p<0.05) were improved significantly. Both the baseline SPO2 level before the 6MWT [MD 1.07, p<0.05] and the SPO2 level after the 6MWT [MD 1.16, p<0.05] showed a significant improvement. The rating of perceived exertion(dyspnea) [MD 1.30, p<0.05] was reduced significantly after the 8-week program.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that home-based pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective option for improving lung function and physical functional capacity by reducing dyspnea perception and improving the saturation of peripheral oxygen (SPO2) level, and enhancing the quality of life in people with pulmonary fibrosis.

Pulmonary diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide and nitric oxide after COVID-19: A prospective cohort study (the SECURe study)

Many patients exhibit persistently reduced pulmonary diffusing capacity after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this study, dual test gas diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide and nitric oxide (DL,CO,NO) metrics and their relationship to disease severity and physical performance were examined in patients who previously had COVID-19. An initial cohort of 148 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 of all severities between March 2020 and March 2021 had a DL,CO,NO measurement performed using the single-breath method at 5.7 months follow-up. All patients with at least one abnormal DL,CO,NO metric (n = 87) were revaluated at 12.5 months follow-up. The DL,CO,NO was used to provide the pulmonary diffusing capacity for nitric oxide (DL,NO), the pulmonary diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DL,CO,5s), the alveolar-capillary membrane diffusing capacity and the pulmonary capillary blood volume. At both 5.7 and 12.5 months, physical performance was assessed using a 30 s sit-to-stand test and the 6 min walk test. Approximately 60% of patients exhibited a severity-dependent decline in at least one DL,CO,NO metric at 5.7 months follow-up. At 12.5 months, both DL,NO and DL,CO,5s had returned towards normal but still remained abnormal in two-thirds of the patients. Concurrently, improvements in physical performance were observed, but with no apparent relationship to any DL,CO,NO metric. The severity-dependent decline in DL,NO and DL,CO observed at 5.7 months after COVID-19 appears to be reduced consistently at 12.5 months follow-up in the majority of patients, despite marked improvements in physical performance.

The effect of mild to moderate COVID-19 infection on the cardiorespiratory fitness of firefighters

Introduction

An adequate level of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is critical for firefighters to perform the strenuous and physiologically demanding work of firefighting safely and effectively. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been shown to negatively impact CRF in both the acute phase and longer-term following infection. This study aimed to determine changes to the CRF of firefighters pre- to post-mild to moderate COVID-19 infection and to investigate the impact of days past COVID-19 infection on change in CRF.

Methods

CRF measures from cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) at annual occupational health exams that occurred pre-COVID-19 infection in 2019 were obtained for firefighters from seven Arizona fire departments. Measures were compared to CPET evaluations from annual health exams the following year in a cohort of firefighters who self-reported mild to moderate illness following COVID-19 infection between exams.

Results

Among a cohort of 103 firefighters, mean age 40 ± 9 years, CRF [as measured by peak oxygen consumption (VO2)] declined by an average of 2.55 ml·kg-1·min-1 or 7.3% (d = -0.38, p < 0.001) following COVID-19 infection (mean time from COVID-19 infection to CPET was 110 ± 78 days). The number of days past COVID-19 infection showed a small, yet significant, relationship to peak VO2 (r = 0.250, p = 0.011). Estimated marginal effects indicated that when biological sex, age, and BMI are controlled for, predicted peak VO2 returned to pre-COVID-19 values ~300 days after COVID-19 infection.

Conclusion

Peak VO2 (ml·kg-1·min-1) declined 7.3% among firefighters an average of 110 days past reporting mild to moderate COVID-19 infection. This decrease has implications for the operational readiness and safety of firefighters.

Comparison of the 12-month impact of COVID-19 and SARS on physiological capacity and health-related quality of life

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the differences in medium to long-term recovery on spirometry, 6-minute walking distance (6MWD) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) between COVID-19 and SARS.

METHODS

We performed a 12-month prospective study on COVID-19 survivors. The changes in dynamic lung volumes at spirometry (%predicted FEV1, %predicted FVC), 6MWD and HRQoL at 1-3, 6 to 12 months were compared against a historical cohort of SARS survivors using the same study protocol. The residual radiological changes in HRCT in COVID-19 survivors were correlated with their functional capacity.

RESULTS

108 COVID-19 survivors of various disease severity (asymptomatic 2.9%, mild 33.3%, moderate 47.2%, severe 8.3%, critical 8.3%) were recruited. When compared with 97 SARS survivors, 108 COVID-19 survivors were older (48.1 ± 16.4 vs. 36.1 ± 9.5 years, p < 0.001) and required less additional support during hospitalization; with lower dynamic lung volumes, shorter 6MWD and better physical component score. Both groups of survivors had comparable changes in these parameters at subsequent follow-ups. Both COVID-19 and SARS survivors had similar mental component score (MCS) at 6 and 12 months. COVID-19 survivors initially experienced less (between-group difference, -3.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] -5.5 to -0.7, p = 0.012) and then more improvement (between-group difference 2.9, 95%, CI 0.8 to 5.1, p = 0.007) than SARS survivors in the MCS at 1-3 to 6 months and 6 to 12 months respectively. Forty (44.0%) out of 91 COVID-19 survivors had residual abnormalities on HRCT at 12 months, with a negative correlation between the severity scores of parenchymal changes and 6MWD (r=-0.239, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 survivors demonstrated a similar recovery speed in dynamic lung volumes and exercise capacity, but different paces of psychological recovery as SARS survivors in the convalescent phase. The severity of parenchymal changes in HRCT is negatively correlated with the 6MWD of COVID-19 survivors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This prospective study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 2 November 2020 (Identifier: NCT04611243).

Does COVID-19 impair V̇o2peak in patients with cardiorespiratory disease? Insight from cardiopulmonary responses to maximal exercise pre- and post-illness

Reduced exercise capacity has been suggested as a cardinal sequela of COVID-19. However, only cross-sectional approaches that either do not consider individuals with concomitant cardiorespiratory disease or account for exercise capacity before infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) support this assumption. Is reduced exercise capacity a sequela of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with concomitant cardiorespiratory disease? We retrospectively reviewed cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) data collected across three hospitals between October 2018 and March 2022. Forty-two patients who completed a CPET before and after COVID-19 and 25 patients who performed two separate CPETs but did not contract COVID-19 (CTL) were included. Within each patient, the same test protocol was performed at the first and second CPETs. The time between CPETs was similar between the groups (COVID-19 489 ± 534 vs. CTL 534 ± 257 days, P = 0.662). The COVID-19 group performed the CPETs 312 ± 232 days before and 176 ± 110 days after infection. Exercise time, peak heart rate, peak systolic pressure, oxygen uptake (V̇o2) at anaerobic threshold, peak ventilation, and ventilatory efficiency were not different between the CPETs in both groups. Peak V̇o2 was reduced from before to after SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, the change in V̇o2peak from the first to the second CPET was not different between COVID-19 vs. CTL. Accounting for V̇o2peak before COVID-19 and including a group of control patients, we find limited evidence for reduced exercise capacity as a sequela of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with concomitant cardiorespiratory disease.NEW & NOTEWORTHY There is accumulating evidence that reduced exercise capacity is, or can be, an outcome following COVID-19. However, evidence to date relies upon cross-sectional approaches that either do not consider patients with concomitant cardiorespiratory disease or account for pre-infection exercise capacity data. Accounting for V̇o2peak before COVID-19 and including a group of control patients, we find limited evidence for reduced exercise capacity as a sequela of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with concomitant cardiorespiratory disease.

[The role of the cardiopulmonary exercise test and pulmonary rehabilitation in long COVID-19]

INTRODUCTION

Long COVID refers to persistent symptoms, lasting more than 4 weeks after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, even though the infection itself has been successfully controlled and remedied. Patient complaints are diverse, and the underlying physiopathological mechanisms are not well understood. Dyspnea and muscle fatigue are among the most commonly reported symptoms.

STATE OF THE ART

Cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) has been recognized as a useful tool in investigation of unexplained dyspnea. In patients with chronic lung disease, pulmonary rehabilitation is a program designed to counteract dyspnea, to increase exercise capacity and to improve quality of life.

PERSPECTIVES

Publications on CPET and pulmonary rehabilitation are needed in order to deepen comprehension and enhance management of long-COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

CPET reports have shown that symptoms persisting in the aftermath of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection may be related to deconditioning, a common occurrence after ICU stay, to cardiac dysautonomia subsequent to critical infections and, finally, to dysfunctional breathing subsequent to mild infections. These findings justify pulmonary rehabilitation, which has proven to be effective regardless of the severity of the initial infection, not only immediately after hospital discharge, but also at later points in time.

Dysfunctional breathing symptoms, functional impact and quality of life in patients with long COVID-19: a prospective case series

BACKGROUND

Dysfunctional breathing is increasingly recognised after SARS-CoV-2 infection, but the associated symptoms, functional impact and quality of life have not been systematically studied.

METHODS

This study describes a prospective case series of 48 patients with dysfunctional breathing based on compatible symptoms and an abnormal breathing pattern during cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Patients with underlying disease that could explain these symptoms were excluded. Median time from COVID-19 to evaluation was 212 (IQR 121) days. Self-administered questionnaires, including the Nijmegen questionnaire, Short-Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, modified Medical Research Council scale, post-COVID-19 Functional Scale, and specific long COVID symptoms, were the outcome measures.

RESULTS

On average, mean V'O₂ was preserved. Pulmonary function tests were within limits of normality. Hyperventilation, periodic deep sighs/erratic breathing and mixed types of dysfunctional breathing were diagnosed in 20.8%, 47.1% and 33.3% of patients, respectively. After dyspnoea, the five most frequent symptoms using the Nijmegen scale with a cut-off of ≥3 were faster/deeper breathing (75.6%), palpitations (63.8%), sighs (48.7%), unable to breathe deeply (46.3%) and yawning (46.2%). Median Nijmegen and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale scores were 28 (IQR 20) and 16.5 (IQR 11), respectively. SF-36 scores were lower than the reference value.

CONCLUSIONS

Long COVID patients with dysfunctional breathing have a high burden of symptoms, functional impact and a low quality of life, despite no or negligible organic damage.

Physical Therapy for Adults with Heart Failure

Heart failure (HF) is a complex clinical syndrome caused by structural and/or functional abnormalities that results in significant disease burdens not only to the patients and their families but also to the society. Common symptoms/signs of HF include dyspnea, fatigue, and exercise intolerance, which significantly reduce the quality of life of individuals. Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2019, it has been found that individuals with cardiovascular disease are more vulnerable to COVID-19-related cardiac sequelae including HF. In this article, we review the updated diagnosis, classifications, and interventional guidelines of HF. We also discuss the link between COVID-19 and HF. The latest evidence about physical therapy for patients with HF in both the stable chronic phase and acute cardiac decompensation phase is reviewed. Physical therapy for HF patients with circulatory support devices is also described.

Changes in cardiopulmonary exercise capacity and limitations 3-12 months after COVID-19

RATIONALE

To describe cardiopulmonary function during exercise 12 months after hospital discharge for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), assess the change from 3 to 12 months, and compare the results with matched controls without COVID-19.

METHODS

In this prospective, longitudinal, multicentre cohort study, hospitalised COVID-19 patients were examined using a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) 3 and 12 months after discharge. At 3 months, 180 performed a successful CPET, and 177 did so at 12 months (mean age 59.3 years, 85 females). The COVID-19 patients were compared with controls without COVID-19 matched for age, sex, body mass index and comorbidity. Main outcome was peak oxygen uptake (V'_{O2  peak}).

RESULTS

Exercise intolerance (V'_{O2  peak} <80% predicted) was observed in 23% of patients at 12 months, related to circulatory (28%), ventilatory (17%) and other limitations including deconditioning and dysfunctional breathing (55%). Estimated mean difference between 3 and 12 months showed significant increases in V'_{O2  peak} % pred (5.0 percentage points (pp), 95% CI 3.1-6.9 pp; p<0.001), V'_{O2  peak}·kg^-1 % pred (3.4 pp, 95% CI 1.6-5.1 pp; p<0.001) and oxygen pulse % pred (4.6 pp, 95% CI 2.5-6.8 pp; p<0.001). V'_{O2  peak} was 2440 mL·min^-1 in COVID-19 patients compared to 2972 mL·min^-1 in matched controls.

CONCLUSIONS

1 year after hospital discharge for COVID-19, the majority (77%), had normal exercise capacity. Only every fourth had exercise intolerance and in these circulatory limiting factors were more common than ventilator factors. Deconditioning was common. V'_{O2  peak} and oxygen pulse improved significantly from 3 months.

Low Cardiorespiratory Fitness Post-COVID-19: A Narrative Review

Patients recovering from COVID-19 often report symptoms of exhaustion, fatigue and dyspnoea and present with exercise intolerance persisting for months post-infection. Numerous studies investigated these sequelae and their possible underlying mechanisms using cardiopulmonary exercise testing. We aimed to provide an in-depth discussion as well as an overview of the contribution of selected organ systems to exercise intolerance based on the Wasserman gears. The gears represent the pulmonary system, cardiovascular system, and periphery/musculature and mitochondria. Thirty-two studies that examined adult patients post-COVID-19 via cardiopulmonary exercise testing were included. In 22 of 26 studies reporting cardiorespiratory fitness (herein defined as peak oxygen uptake-VO2peak), VO2peak was < 90% of predicted value in patients. VO2peak was notably below normal even in the long-term. Given the available evidence, the contribution of respiratory function to low VO2peak seems to be only minor except for lung diffusion capacity. The prevalence of low lung diffusion capacity was high in the included studies. The cardiovascular system might contribute to low VO2peak via subnormal cardiac output due to chronotropic incompetence and reduced stroke volume, especially in the first months post-infection. Chronotropic incompetence was similarly present in the moderate- and long-term follow-up. However, contrary findings exist. Peripheral factors such as muscle mass, strength and perfusion, mitochondrial function, or arteriovenous oxygen difference may also contribute to low VO2peak. More data are required, however. The findings of this review do not support deconditioning as the primary mechanism of low VO2peak post-COVID-19. Post-COVID-19 sequelae are multifaceted and require individual diagnosis and treatment.

Cardiac Complications of COVID-19 Infection and the Role of Physical Activity

Since December 2019, the newly emerging coronavirus has become a global pandemic with >250 million people infected and >5 million deaths worldwide. Infection with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) causes a severe immune response and hypercoagulable state leading to tissue injury, organ damage, and thrombotic events. It is well known that COVID-19 infection predominately affects the lungs; however, the cardiovascular complications of the disease have been a major cause of morbidity and mortality. In addition, patients with cardiovascular disease are vulnerable to contract a severe form of the illness and increased mortality. A significant number of patients who survived the disease may experience post-COVID-19 syndrome with a variety of symptoms and physical limitations. Here, we review the cardiac complications of COVID-19 infection and the results of cardiopulmonary exercise testing and guidelines for exercise training after infection.

Effects of Aerobic Training in Patients with Subacute COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial

Many clinical practice recommendations indicate rehabilitation as essential for patients with sequelae of severe or critical COVID-19 and suggest the prompt initiation of a multicomponent rehabilitation program focused on aerobic and endurance training. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding aerobic exercise are lacking. Therefore, we aimed to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of the addition of aerobic training to standard rehabilitation in subjects with subacute COVID-19. Participants were 32/214 patients with the sequelae of severe or critical COVID-19 in the acute phase who were eligible and agreed to participate in the study (eligibility = 15%, recruitment = 100%). After randomization and assessment with functional and strength tests, all the participants underwent an inpatient-tailored rehabilitation program (50 min/day, 5 days/week, 10 sessions); in addition, the experimental group performed a low- to moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (30 min/day, 10 sessions). No dropouts or severe adverse events were reported, with an attendance rate of 95.6%. Most of the secondary outcomes significantly improved in both groups, but the improvement in the Functional Independence Measure and Cumulated Ambulation Score-Italian version was significantly greater in the experimental group (at least, p < 0.05). This RCT showed that aerobic exercise is feasible and safe in subacute COVID-19. Moreover, it appears to be beneficial and useful in improving patients' independence and mobility.

Use of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing to Evaluate Long COVID-19 Symptoms in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Reduced exercise capacity is commonly reported among individuals with COVID-19 symptoms more than 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection (long COVID-19 [LC]). Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is the criterion standard to measure exercise capacity and identify patterns of exertional intolerance.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the difference in exercise capacity among individuals with and without LC symptoms and characterize physiological patterns of limitations to elucidate possible mechanisms of LC.

DATA SOURCES

A search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, preprint servers, conference abstracts, and cited references was performed on December 20, 2021, and again on May 24, 2022. A preprint search of medrxiv.org, biorxiv.org, and researchsquare.com was performed on June 9, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies of adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection more than 3 months earlier that included CPET-measured peak oxygen consumption (V̇o2) were screened independently by 2 blinded reviewers; 72 (2%) were selected for full-text review, and 35 (1%) met the inclusion criteria. An additional 3 studies were identified from preprint servers.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction was performed by 2 independent reviewers according to the PRISMA reporting guideline. Data were pooled using random-effects models.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Difference in peak V̇o2 (in mL/kg/min) among individuals with and without persistent COVID-19 symptoms more than 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

RESULTS

A total of 38 studies were identified that performed CPET on 2160 individuals 3 to 18 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection, including 1228 with symptoms consistent with LC. Most studies were case series of individuals with LC or cross-sectional assessments within posthospitalization cohorts. Based on a meta-analysis of 9 studies including 464 individuals with LC symptoms and 359 without symptoms, the mean peak V̇o2 was -4.9 (95% CI, -6.4 to -3.4) mL/kg/min among those with symptoms with a low degree of certainty. Deconditioning and peripheral limitations (abnormal oxygen extraction) were common, but dysfunctional breathing and chronotropic incompetence were also described. The existing literature was limited by small sample sizes, selection bias, confounding, and varying symptom definitions and CPET interpretations, resulting in high risk of bias and heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis study suggest that exercise capacity was reduced more than 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection among individuals with symptoms consistent with LC compared with individuals without LC symptoms, with low confidence. Potential mechanisms for exertional intolerance other than deconditioning include altered autonomic function (eg, chronotropic incompetence, dysfunctional breathing), endothelial dysfunction, and muscular or mitochondrial pathology.

Exercise Intolerance in Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19 and the Value of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing- a Mini-Review

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), with systemic organ damage in the most severe forms. Long-term complications of SARS-CoV-2 appear to be restricted to severe presentations of COVID-19, but many patients with persistent symptoms have never been hospitalized. Post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) represents a heterogeneous group of symptoms characterized by cardiovascular, general, respiratory, and neuropsychiatric sequelae. The pace of evidence acquisition with PASC has been rapid, but the mechanisms behind it are complex and not yet fully understood. In particular, exercise intolerance shares some features with other classic respiratory and cardiac disorders. However, cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) provides a comprehensive assessment and can unmask the pathophysiological mechanism behind exercise intolerance in gray-zone PASC. This mini-review explores the utility of CPET and aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of PASC by summarizing the current evidence.

Persistent dyspnea after COVID-19 is not related to cardiopulmonary impairment; a cross-sectional study of persistently dyspneic COVID-19, non-dyspneic COVID-19 and controls

Background: Up to 53% of individuals who had mild COVID-19 experience symptoms for >3-month following infection (Long-CoV). Dyspnea is reported in 60% of Long-CoV cases and may be secondary to impaired exercise capacity (VO2peak) as a result of pulmonary, pulmonary vascular, or cardiac insult. This study examined whether cardiopulmonary mechanisms could explain exertional dyspnea in Long-CoV. Methods: A cross-sectional study of participants with Long-CoV (n = 28, age 40 ± 11 years, 214 ± 85 days post-infection) and age- sex- and body mass index-matched COVID-19 naïve controls (Con, n = 24, age 41 ± 12 years) and participants fully recovered from COVID-19 (ns-CoV, n = 14, age 37 ± 9 years, 198 ± 89 days post-infection) was conducted. Participants self-reported symptoms and baseline dyspnea (modified Medical Research Council, mMRC, dyspnea grade), then underwent a comprehensive pulmonary function test, cardiopulmonary exercise test, exercise pulmonary diffusing capacity measurement, and rest and exercise echocardiography. Results: VO2peak, pulmonary function and cardiac/pulmonary vascular parameters were not impaired in Long- or ns-CoV compared to normative values (VO2peak: 106 ± 25 and 107 ± 25%predicted, respectively) and cardiopulmonary responses to exercise were otherwise normal. When Long-CoV were stratified by clinical dyspnea severity (mMRC = 0 vs mMRC≥1), there were no between-group differences in VO2peak. During submaximal exercise, dyspnea and ventilation were increased in the mMRC≥1 group, despite normal operating lung volumes, arterial saturation, diffusing capacity and indicators of pulmonary vascular pressures. Interpretation: Persistent dyspnea after COVID-19 was not associated with overt cardiopulmonary impairment or exercise intolerance. Interventions focusing on dyspnea management may be appropriate for Long-CoV patients who report dyspnea without cardiopulmonary impairment.

ESCMID rapid guidelines for assessment and management of long COVID

SCOPE

The aim of these guidelines is to provide evidence-based recommendations for the assessment and management of individuals with persistent symptoms after acute COVID-19 infection and to provide a definition for this entity, termed 'long COVID'.

METHODS

We performed a search of the literature on studies addressing epidemiology, symptoms, assessment, and treatment of long COVID. The recommendations were grouped by these headings and by organ systems for assessment and treatment. An expert opinion definition of long COVID is provided. Symptoms were reviewed by a search of the available literature. For assessment recommendations, we aimed to perform a diagnostic meta-analysis, but no studies provided relevant results. For treatment recommendations we performed a systematic review of the literature in accordance with the PRISMA statement. We aimed to evaluate patient-related outcomes, including quality of life, return to baseline physical activity, and return to work. Quality assessment of studies included in the systematic review is provided according to study design.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Evidence was insufficient to provide any recommendation other than conditional guidance. The panel recommends considering routine blood tests, chest imaging, and pulmonary functions tests for patients with persistent respiratory symptoms at 3 months. Other tests should be performed mainly to exclude other conditions according to symptoms. For management, no evidence-based recommendations could be provided. Physical and respiratory rehabilitation should be considered. On the basis of limited evidence, the panel suggests designing high-quality prospective clinical studies/trials, including a control group, to further evaluate the assessment and management of individuals with persistent symptoms of COVID-19.

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing to evaluate post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 ("Long COVID"): a systematic review and meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Reduced exercise capacity is commonly reported among individuals with Long COVID (LC). Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is the gold-standard to measure exercise capacity to identify causes of exertional intolerance.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection on exercise capacity including those with and without LC symptoms and to characterize physiologic patterns of limitations to elucidate possible mechanisms of LC.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science, preprint severs, conference abstracts, and cited references in December 2021 and again in May 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

We included studies of adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection at least three months prior that included CPET measured peak VO ₂ . 3,523 studies were screened independently by two blinded reviewers; 72 (2.2%) were selected for full-text review and 36 (1.2%) met the inclusion criteria; we identified 3 additional studies from preprint servers.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction was done by two independent reviewers according to PRISMA guidelines. Data were pooled with random-effects models.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A priori primary outcomes were differences in peak VO ₂ (in ml/kg/min) among those with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection and LC.

RESULTS

We identified 39 studies that performed CPET on 2,209 individuals 3-18 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection, including 944 individuals with LC symptoms and 246 SARS-CoV-2 uninfected controls. Most were case-series of individuals with LC or post-hospitalization cohorts. By meta-analysis of 9 studies including 404 infected individuals, peak VO ₂ was 7.4 ml/kg/min (95%CI 3.7 to 11.0) lower among infected versus uninfected individuals. A high degree of heterogeneity was attributable to patient and control selection, and these studies mostly included previously hospitalized, persistently symptomatic individuals. Based on meta-analysis of 9 studies with 464 individuals with LC, peak VO ₂ was 4.9 ml/kg/min (95%CI 3.4 to 6.4) lower compared to those without symptoms. Deconditioning was common, but dysfunctional breathing, chronotropic incompetence, and abnormal oxygen extraction were also described.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These studies suggest that exercise capacity is reduced after SARS-CoV-2 infection especially among those hospitalized for acute COVID-19 and individuals with LC. Mechanisms for exertional intolerance besides deconditioning may be multifactorial or related to underlying autonomic dysfunction.

Predictors of Submaximal Exercise Test Attainment in Adults Reporting Long COVID Symptoms

Adults with long COVID often report intolerance to exercise. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) has been used in many settings to measure exercise ability but has been conducted in a few long COVID cohorts. We conducted CPET in a sample of adults reporting long COVID symptoms using a submaximal cycle ergometer protocol. We studied pre-exercise predictors of achieving 85% of the age-predicted maximum heart rate (85%HRmax) using logistic regression. Eighty participants were included (mean age 46 years, range 25−78, 71% women). Forty participants (50%) did not reach 85%HRmax. On average, non-achievers reached 84% of their predicted 85%HRmax. No adverse events occurred. Participants who did not achieve 85%HRmax were older (p < 0.001), had more recent COVID-19 illness (p = 0.012) with higher frequency of hospitalization (p = 0.025), and had been more affected by dizziness (p = 0.041) and joint pain (p = 0.028). In the logistic regression model including age, body mass index, time since COVID-19, COVID-19-related hospitalization, dizziness, joint pain, pre-existing cardiopulmonary disease, and use of beta blockers, independent predictors of achieving 85%HRmax were younger age (p = 0.001) and longer time since COVID-19 (p = 0.008). Our cross-sectional findings suggest that exercise tolerance in adults with long COVID has potential to improve over time. Longitudinal research should assess the extent to which this may occur and its mechanisms. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05027724 (TROPIC Study).

Deconditioning in COVID-19 survivors with reduced exercise performance: A role for endothelial dysfunction?

Recent studies have reported an impaired exercise response at cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) during convalescence from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In detail, these previous reports suggest the presence of functional limitations in a consistent proportion of COVID-19 survivors, in the absence of relevant alterations of ventilatory and gas exchange parameters at CPET. Therefore, deconditioning has been proposed as the main mechanism of the reduced peak oxygen uptake in this clinical setting. This interpretation of the results is supported by the evidence that deconditioning is a recognized aspect of the post-intensive care syndrome, with acute sarcopenia being frequently observed among COVID-19 survivors. Here, we hypothesized the role of endothelial dysfunction as a key pathogenic mechanism of the functional limitations of COVID-19, including multisystem deconditioning and subsequent exercise intolerance.