Long COVID: Distinction between Organ Damage and Deconditioning, 2021, Kersten et al

Abstract

(1) Background: Long COVID syndrome refers to long-term sequelae of the novel viral disease, which occur even in patients with initially mild disease courses. However, there is still little evidence of the actual organic consequences and their frequency, and there is no standardized workup to diagnose long COVID syndrome yet. In this study, we aim to determine the efficiency of a stepwise diagnostic approach for reconvalescent COVID-19 patients with cardiopulmonary symptoms.

(2) Methods: The diagnostic workup for long COVID syndrome included three steps. In the first step, the focus was on broad applicability (e.g., blood tests and body plethysmography). In the second step, cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and cardiac MRI (CMR) were used. The third step was tailored to the individual needs of each patient. The observation period lasted from 22 February to 14 May 2021.

(3) Results: We examined 231 patients in our long COVID unit (mean [SD] age, 47.8 [14.9], 132 [57.1%] women). Acute illness occurred a mean (SD) of 121 (77) days previously. Suspicious findings in the first visit were seen in 80 (34.6%) patients, prompting further diagnostics. Thirty-six patients were further examined with CPET and CMR. Of those, 16 (44.4%) had pathological findings. The rest had functional complaints without organ damage (“functional long COVID”). Cardiopulmonary sequelae were found in asymptomatic as well as severe courses of the initial COVID-19 disease.

(4) Conclusions: A structured diagnostic pathway for the diagnosis of long COVID syndrome is practicable and rational in terms of resource allocation. With this approach, manifest organ damage can be accurately and comprehensively diagnosed and distinguished from functional complaints.

Open access, https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/17/3782/htm

 

In conclusion, Long Covid is an illness of contrasts, uh?

I'm not so sure about an entire step that consists of "stuff happens" and research that limits itself to looking at familiar things and concluding anything out of it. "We tried a bunch of stuff and confirm that we can follow a basic formula". Well, good for you.

It's been 1.5 years and researchers are still not collaborating, still doing the same small worthless studies alone in their corner.

And this:

"Post-infection syndrome". Obviously no such thing with this name. Chronic illness is basically Voldemort, confirmed. Even when they need to refer to the existing concept, they could have used PVFS, they will actually choose to use a generic term that doesn't refer to anything. Because it cannot be named. Amazing. It's like a politically corrected report on climate disaster that redacts any reference to climate change.

For funsies I checked what they mean by functional and they don't bother, left to the reader's imagination.

 

17 people to publish this . just how broken is the education/academic industry . since there is no real oversight or any interest in fixing anything . we might as well start consulting fortune tellers for help with medical matters .

 

The gravy train has yet to get up to speed. ...