Post-COVID Pulmonary Function Test Evaluation

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Since the lung is the most affected organ by COVID-19 disease, we aimed to evaluate the pulmonary function test, presence of hypoxemia, and Post-COVID-19 Functional Status Scale in 3- to 6-month post-COVID period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Post-COVID-19 Functional Status Scale, pulse oxygen saturation, and pulmonary function test were evaluated in 67 outpatients/inpatients after 3-6 months following COVID-19 (positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction on nasopharyngeal swab) disease. Pre-COVID pulmonary function test parameters were available in 33 patients, and these were compared with post-COVID pulmonary function test parameters. Results: We found 20.9% (14 patients) restrictive and 11.9% (8 patients) obstructive patterns in pulmonary function test. Of those with forced vital capacity < 80%, 53.3% were patients without known lung diseases. When pulmonary function test values before and after COVID-19 were compared, only a loss of 130 mL in forced expiratory volume in 1 second was determined ( P = .005). About 65.4% of the patients with dyspnea were in the group without a lung disease ( P = .002) and 66.7% of patients with forced expiratory volume in 1 second and forced vital capacity of <80% had dyspnea complaint ( P = 0.048, P = 0.012). Oxygen saturation was lower in patients with lung disease ( P = .012) and was significantly lower in patients with forced vital capacity < 80% ( P = .023). No correlation was found between Post-COVID-19 Functional Status Scale and pulmonary function test parameters ( P > .05). Smoking, hospitalization, oxygen support, and the severity of computed tomography involvement did not impact pulmonary function test. Conclusion: In post-COVID patients, the major disorder in the respiratory function test was determined as a restriction. However, advanced tests such as lung volumes and carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (DLCO) measurement and high-resolution lung tomography are needed to differentiate in terms of physical functional limitation or parenchymal fibrosis.

Pulmonary function 3–6 months after acute COVID-19: A systematic review and multicentre cohort study

“…Results of all included studies can be found in Table S1 . All studies included a population with a mean or median age between 47 and 66 years and most studies had an equal distribution of males and females.The majority of the studies were conducted in Europe (n = 26) [ [3] , [4] , [35] , [36] , [37] , [38] , [39] , [40] , [41] , [42] , [43] , [44] , [45] , [46] , [47] , [48] , [49] , [50] , [51] , [52] , [53] , [54] , [55] , [56] , [57] , [58] ],49,51,56,60,62,65,66,67,69,70,74,76,77,79,80,81,83,84], six were conducted in North America [ [59] , [60] , [61] , [62] , [63] , [64] ], four in South America [ [65] , [66] , [67] , [68] ] and eleven in Asia [ [16] , [17] , [69] , [70] , [71] , [72] , [73] , [74] , [75] , [76] , [77] ]. The population of the studies varied between 17 and 1733 with a mean of 177 participants.…”