RESUMEN
Background: Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) assesses exercise capacity and causes of exercise limitation in patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH). At altitude, changes occur in the ventilatory pattern and a decrease in arterial oxygen pressure in healthy; these changes are increased in patients with cardiopulmonary disease. Our objective was to compare the response to exercise and gas exchange between patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) residing at the altitude of Bogotá (2640 m). Methods: All patients performed an incremental CPET with measurement of oxygen consumption ( VO 2 ), dead space (VD/VT), ventilatory equivalents (VE/ VCO 2 ), and alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient ( PA-aO 2 ). X 2 test and one-way analysis of variance were used for comparisons between PAH and CTEPH. Results: We included 53 patients, 29 with PAH, 24 with CTEPH, and 102 controls as a reference of the normal response to exercise at altitude. CTEPH patients had a higher New York Health Association (NYHA) functional class than PAH (p = 0.037). There were no differences between patients with PAH and CTEPH in hemodynamics and VO 2 % of predicted (67.8 ± 18.7 vs. 66.0 ± 19.8, p < 0.05), but those with CTEPH had higher dyspnea, VD/VT (0.36 ± 0.09 vs. 0.23 ± 0.9, p < 0.001), VE/ VCO 2 (45.8 ± 7.1 vs. 39.3 ± 5.6, p < 0.001), and PA-aO 2 (19.9 ± 7.6 vs. 13.5 ± 7.6, p < 0.001) than PAH patients. Conclusions: At altitude, patients with PH present severe alterations in gas exchange during exercise. There were no differences in exercise capacity between PAH and CTEPH, but patients with CTEPH had more dyspnea and greater alterations in gas exchange during exercise. CPET made it possible to identify alterations related to the pathophysiology of CTEPH that could explain the functional class and dyspnea in these patients.
RESUMEN
Resumen Introducción: la fibrosis pulmonar idiopática (FPI) es una enfermedad pulmonar intersticial (EPID) de mal pronóstico, considerada huérfana en Colombia. Un diagnóstico correcto tiene implicaciones para el paciente y los costos de atención. Los grupos de discusión multidisciplinaria (GDM) se consideran el estándar de oro en el diagnóstico. No hay estudios previos en Colombia de la experiencia de un GDM. Objetivos: evaluar el impacto de un GDM en una institución de cuarto nivel en Bogotá en cambio de diagnóstico de pacientes con EPID y la concordancia entre el diagnóstico inicial y final de FPI. Material y métodos: pacientes con EPID evaluados entre 2015-2018 por el GDM conformado por neumólogos, radiólogo, patólogo y reumatólogos. Criterios ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT de diagnóstico de FPI. Descripción del cambio en el diagnóstico y concordancia entre el diagnóstico inicial y del GDM en FPI. Resultados: de 165 pacientes con EPID se cambió el diagnóstico en 35.2%. En 77.3% pacientes con diagnóstico inicial de FPI y en 6.7% con diagnóstico inicial diferente a FPI el GDM confirmó FPI. Al descartar FPI, los principales diagnósticos fueron neumonitis de hipersensibilidad en fase crónica (29.4%) y neumonía intersticial no específica (23.5%). El índice kappa entre el diagnóstico inicial y final de FPI fue 0.71 (0.60-0.82). Conclusiones: el GDM en EPID tuvo un importante impacto clínico demostrado por un alto porcentaje de cambió del diagnóstico de remisión. Se descartó el diagnóstico inicial de FPI en un porcentaje significativo de pacientes y se ratificó en un grupo menor sin esta sospecha clínica inicial. (Acta Med Colomb 2022; 47. DOI:https://doi.org/10.36104/amc.2022.2017).
Abstract Introduction: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is an interstitial lung disease (ILD) with a poor prognosis, considered an orphan disease in Colombia. An accurate diagnosis has implications for the patient and healthcare costs. Multidisciplinary discussion groups (MDGs) are considered the gold standard for diagnosis. There are no prior studies in Colombia on the experience of an MDG. Objectives: to evaluate the impact of an MDG in a quaternary care institution in Bogotá on the change in the diagnosis of patients with ILD and the concordance between the initial and final diagnosis of IPF. Materials and methods: patents with ILD evaluated from 2015-2018 by the MDG made up of pulmonologists, a radiologist, a pathologist and rheumatologists. The ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT diagnostic criteria for IPF. A description of changes in the diagnosis and the agreement between the initial diagnosis and the MDG diagnosis of IPF. Results: out of 165 patients with ILD, the diagnosis was changed in 32.5%. The MDG confirmed IPF in 77.3% of patients with an initial diagnosis of ILD and 6.7% of those with a different initial diagnosis. When IPF was ruled out, the main diagnoses were chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (24.8%) and nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (23.5%). The Kappa index between the initial and final IPF diagnoses was 0.71 (0.60-0.82). Conclusions: the MDG on ILD had a significant clinical impact evidenced by a high percentage of change in the referral diagnosis. The initial diagnosis of IPF was ruled out in a significant percentage of patients and confirmed in a smaller group which did not have this initial clinical suspicion. (Acta Med Colomb 2022; 47. DOI:https://doi.org/10.36104/amc.2022.2017).
RESUMEN
resumen está disponible en el texto completo
Abstract Recent studies have reported the occurrence of thrombotic phenomena or coagulopathy in patients with COVID-19. There are divergent positions regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of these phenomena, and current clinical practice is based solely on deductions by extension from retrospective studies, case series, observational studies, and international guidelines developed prior to the pandemic. In this context, the aim was to generate a group of recommendations on the prevention, diagnosis and management of thrombotic complications associated with COVID-19. Methods: A rapid guidance was carried out applying the GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks and an iterative participation system, with statistical and qualitative analysis. Results: 31 clinical recommendations were generated focused on: a) Coagulation tests in symptomatic adults with suspected infection or confirmed SARS CoV-2 infection; b) Thromboprophylaxis in adults diagnosed with COVID-19 (Risk scales, thromboprophylaxis for outpatient, in-hospital management, and duration of thromboprophylaxis after discharge from hospitalization), c) Diagnosis and treatment of thrombotic complications, and d) Management of people with previous indication of anticoagulant agents. Conclusions: Recommendations of this consensus guide clinical decision-making regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of thrombotic phenomena in patients with COVID-19, and represent an agreement that will help decrease the dispersion in clinical practices according to the challenge imposed by the pandemic.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 , Embolia y Trombosis , Consenso , AnticoagulantesRESUMEN
Introducción estudios recientes han reportado fenómenos trombóticos o coagulopatía en pacientes con COVID-19. Hay posiciones divergentes en cuanto a la prevención, el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de estos fenómenos, y la práctica clínica actual está basada únicamente en deducciones por extensión a partir de estudios retrospectivos, series de casos, estudios observacionales y guías internacionales desarrolladas previas a la pandemia. Objetivo establecer una serie de recomendaciones sobre prevención, diagnóstico y manejo de las complicaciones trombóticas asociadas a COVID-19. Métodos se desarrolló una guía rápida en la que se aplicó el marco de la evidencia a la decisión (EtD) de GRADE y un sistema de participación iterativo, con análisis estadísticos y cualitativos de sus resultados. Resultados se generaron 31 recomendaciones clínicas enfocadas a: a) Pruebas de coagulación en adultos sintomáticos con sospecha de infección o infección confirmada por SARS-CoV-2; b) Tromboprofilaxis en personas adultas con diagnóstico de COVID-19 (escalas de riesgo, tromboprofilaxis de manejo ambulatorio, intrahospitalario y duración de tromboprofilaxis después del egreso de hospitalización), c) Diagnóstico y tratamiento de las complicaciones trombóticas y d) Manejo de personas con indicación previa a usar agentes anticoagulantes. Conclusiones las recomendaciones clínicas de este consenso orientan la toma de decisiones clínicas respecto a prevención, diagnóstico y tratamiento de fenómenos trombóticos en pacientes con COVID-19, y representan un acuerdo que ayudará a disminuir la dispersión en las prácticas clínicas acorde con el desafío que impone la pandemia.
Abstract Introduction: recent studies have reported the occurrence of thrombotic phenomena or coagulopathy in patients with COVID-19. There are divergent positions regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of these phenomena, and current clinical practice is based solely on deductions by extension from retrospective studies, case series, observational studies, and international guidelines developed prior to the pandemic. Objective: to generate a group of recommendations on the prevention, diagnosis and management of thrombotic complications associated with COVID-19. Methods: a rapid guidance was carried out applying the GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks and an iterative participation system, with statistical and qualitative analysis. Results: 31 clinical recommendations were generated focused on: a) Coagulation tests in symptomatic adults with suspected infection or confirmed SARS CoV-2 infection; b) Thromboprophylaxis in adults diagnosed with COVID-19 (Risk scales, thromboprophylaxis for outpatient, in-hospital management, and duration of thromboprophylaxis after discharge from hospitalization), c) Diagnosis and treatment of thrombotic complications, and d) Management of people with previous indication of anticoagulant agents. Conclusions: recommendations of this consensus guide clinical decision-making regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of thrombotic phenomena in patients with COVID-19, and represent an agreement that will help decrease the dispersion in clinical practices according to the challenge imposed by the pandemic.