Residual Lung Injury in Patients Recovering From <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 Critical Illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scarce data exist regarding the natural history of lung lesions detected on ultrasound in those who survive severe COVID-19 pneumonia. OBJECTIVE: We performed a prospective analysis of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) findings in critically ill COVID-19 patients during and after hospitalization. METHODS: We enrolled 171 COVID-19 intensive care unit patients. POCUS of the lungs was performed with phased array (2-4 MHz), convex (2-6 MHz) and linear (10-15 MHz) transducers, scanning 12 lung areas. Chest computed tomography angiography was performed to exclude suspected pulmonary embolism. Survivors were clinically and sonographically evaluated during a 4 month period for evidence of residual lung injury. Chest computed tomography angiography and echocardiography were used to exclude pulmonary hypertension (PH) and chest high-resolution-computed-tomography to exclude interstitial lung disease (ILD) in symptomatic survivors. RESULTS: Cox regression analysis showed that lymphocytopenia (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.88, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.68-0.96, p = .048), increased lactate (HR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.94-1.46, p = 0.049), and D-dimers (HR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.03-1.44, p = .03) were mortality predictors. Non-survivors had increased incidence of pulmonary abnormalities (B-lines, pleural line irregularities, and consolidations) compared to survivors (p < .05). During follow-up, POCUS with clinical and laboratory parameters integrated in the semi-quantitative Riyadh-Residual-Lung-Injury scale had sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.76-0.89) and specificity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.94-0.95) in predicting ILD. The prevalence of PH and ILD (non-specific-interstitial-pneumonia) was 7% and 11.8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: POCUS showed ability to monitor the evolution of severe COVID-19 pneumonia after hospital discharge, supporting its integration in clinical predictive models of residual lung injury.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".