Three to four months after hospitalisation for COVID-19 pneumonia, the most frequently described alteration in respiratory function tests (RFTs) is decreased carbon monoxide transfer capacity (DLCO). Methods: This is a prospective cohort study that included patients hospitalised because of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, three months after their discharge. A clinical evaluation, analytical parameters, chest X-ray, six-minute walk test, spirometry and DLCO–DLNO analysis were performed. Demographic variables, comorbidities, and variables related to the severity of the admission were recorded. Results: Two hundred patients completed the study; 59.5% men, age 62 years, 15.5% admitted to the intensive care unit. The most frequent functional alteration, in 27% of patients, was in the DLCO–DLNO combination. This alteration was associated with age, male sex, degree of dyspnoea, poorer perception of health, and limited ability for physical effort. These patients also presented higher levels of D-Dimer and more residual radiological alterations. In 42% of the patients with diffusion alterations, only reduced DLNO was presented, along with lower D-Dimer levels and less capillary volume involvement. The severity of the process was associated with the reduction in DLCO–DLNO. Conclusions: The most sensitive RFT for the detection of the sequelae of COVID-19 pneumonia was the combined measurement of DLCO–DLNO and this factor was related to patient health status and their capacity for physical exertion. In 40% of these cases, there was only a reduction in DLNO, a finding that may indicate less pulmonary vascular involvement.

Introduction There are no published studies assessing the evolution of combined determination of the lung diffusing capacity for both nitric oxide and carbon monoxide (DLNO and DLCO) 12 months after the discharge of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods Prospective cohort study which included patients who were assessed both 3 and 12 months after an episode of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Their clinical status, health condition, lung function testings (LFTs) results (spirometry, DLNO-DLCO analysis, and six-minute walk test), and chest X-ray/computed tomography scan images were compared. Results 194 patients, age 62 years (P25–75, 51.5–71), 59% men, completed the study. 17% required admission to the intensive care unit. An improvement in the patients’ exercise tolerance, the extent of the areas of ground-glass opacity, and the LFTs between 3 and 12 months following their hospital discharge were found, but without a decrease in their degree of dyspnea or their self-perceived health condition. DLNO was the most significantly altered parameter at 12 months (19.3%). The improvement in DLNO-DLCO mainly occurred at the expense of the recovery of alveolar units and their vascular component, with the membrane factor only improving in patients with more severe infections. Conclusions The combined measurement of DLNO-DLCO is the most sensitive LFT for the detection of the long-term sequelae of COVID-19 pneumonia and it explain better their pathophysiology.

Objective-Although the evidence to date remains limited, we hypothesized that performing protocolized lung ultrasound (LUS) in patients, admitted to a conventional pulmonology hospitalization unit, could improve diagnostic precision. The main objectives of this study were to evaluate the diagnostic contribution and changes in the treatments administered after performing a protocolized LUS in patients hospitalized in a Pulmonology Department ward.Methodology-This was a prospective, observational study, which included patients admitted from the Emergency Department to a conventional Pulmonology Department hospitalization unit, after first being evaluated by a pulmonologist. LUS was performed within the first 48 hours of admission. The diagnosis at the time of discharge was used as the reference diagnosis.Results-A total of 180 patients were included in this study. The admitting diagnoses were the decompensation of an underlying obstructive disease in 60 patients (33.3%), respiratory infection in 93 (51.7%), pulmonary thromboembolism (PE) in 9 (5%), exacerbation of an interstitial lung disease in 14 (7.8%), and other causes in 4 cases (2.2%). Ultrasonography provided new information, unsuspected at the patient's admission, in 117 (65%) of the patients by capturing images suggestive of infection in 63 patients (35%), 1 new case of ILD, 23 (12.7%) cases of cardiogenic edema, and pleural pathology in 19 (10.5%), as well as two tumors and indirect data related to a PE. The use of LUS resulted in the decision to change the already established treatment in 17.2% of the cases.Conclusions-LUS provided additive information in more than half of patients that ended up reclassifying or potentially changing diagnosis or treatment. Thus, including LUS in management algorithms could reduce the need for other complementary tests or unnecessary treatments.

Introduction: There is debate as to whether lung-ultrasound (LUS) can replace lung-auscultation (LA) in the assessment of respiratory diseases. Methodology: The diagnostic validity, safety, and reliability of LA and LUS were analyzed in patients admitted in a pulmonary ward due to decompensated obstructive airway diseases, decompensated interstitial diseases, and pulmonary infections, in a prospective study. Standard formulas were used to calculate the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. The interobserver agreement with respect to the LA and LUS findings was evaluated based on the Kappa coefficient (ᴋ). Results: A total of 115 patients were studied. LUS was more sensitive than the LA in evaluating pulmonary infections (93.59% vs. 77.02%; p = 0.001) and more specifically in the case of decompensated obstructive airway diseases (95.6% vs. 19.10%; p = 0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of LUS was also greater in the case of pulmonary infections (75.65% vs. 60.90%; p = 0.02). The sensitivity and specificity of the combination of LA and LUS was 95.95%, 50% in pulmonary infections, 76.19%, 100% in case of decompensated obstructive airway diseases, and (100%, 88.54%) in case of interstitial diseases. (ᴋ) was 0.71 for an A-pattern, 0.73 for pathological B‑lines, 0.94 for condensations, 0.89 for pleural-effusion, 0.63 for wheezes, 0.38 for rhonchi, 0.68 for fine crackles, 0.18 for coarse crackles, and 0.29 for a normal LA. Conclusions: There is a greater interobserver agreement in the interpretation of LUS-findings compared to that of LA-noises, their combined use improves diagnostic performance in all diseases examined.

No abstract