Search

Background: Not all hypercapnic COPD patients benefit from home noninvasive ventilation (NIV), and mechanisms through which NIV improves clinical outcomes remain uncertain. We aimed to identify "responders" to home NIV, denoted by a beneficial effect of NIV on arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide ( P aCO 2 ), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and survival, and investigated whether NIV achieves its beneficial effect through an improved P aCO 2 ., Methods: We used individual patient data from previous published trials collated for a systematic review. Linear mixed-effect models were conducted to compare the effect of NIV on P aCO 2 , HRQoL and survival, within subgroups defined by patient and treatment characteristics. Secondly, we conducted a causal mediation analysis to investigate whether the effect of NIV is mediated by a change in P aCO 2 ., Findings: Data of 1142 participants from 16 studies were used. Participants treated with lower pressure support (<14 versus ≥14 cmH 2 O) and with lower adherence (<5 versus ≥5 h·day -1 ) had less improvement in P aCO 2 (mean difference (MD) -0.30 kPa, p<0.001 and -0.29 kPa, p<0.001, respectively) and HRQoL (standardised MD 0.10, p=0.002 and 0.11, p=0.02, respectively), but this effect did not persist to survival. P aCO 2 improved more in patients with severe dyspnoea (MD -0.30, p=0.02), and HRQoL improved only in participants with fewer than three exacerbations (standardised MD 0.52, p=0.03). The results of the mediation analysis showed that the effect on HRQoL is mediated partially (23%) by a change in P aCO 2 ., Interpretation: With greater pressure support and better daily NIV usage, a larger improvement in P aCO 2 and HRQoL is achieved. Importantly, we demonstrated that the beneficial effect of home NIV on HRQoL is only partially mediated through a reduction in diurnal P aCO 2 ., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: T. Raveling reports a travel grant from Breas Medical. N.S. Hill reports consulting fees from Philips, consulting fees and payments from Fisher & Paykel, and participates in boards of Breas and Philips. C. Casanova reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Menarini and Novartis, and participates in boards of AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline. E. Clini reports consulting fees from Chiesi Italia and Novartis, payments from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and GaxoSmithKline, and meeting/travel support from Boehringer Ingelheim and Chiesi. T. Köhnlein reports support from Grifols Deutschland GmbH. P.B. Murphy reports grants and payments from Fisher & Paykel, Resmed, Breas Medical and Philips Respironics, and payments from Chiesi and Genzyme. M.L. Duiverman reports grants from Resmed, Philips, Lowenstein, Vivisol, Sencure and Fisher & Paykel, and payments from Chiesi and Breas Medical. P.J. Wijkstra reports grants from Resmed, and grants and consulting fees from Philips., (Copyright ©The authors 2024.)

In the light of missing randomised controlled trials, some arguments suggest that pulmonary rehabilitation has beneficial effects beyond natural recovery https://bit.ly/3ze2xvw., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: R. Gloeckl has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Leitl has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: I. Jarosch has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Schneeberger has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C. Nell has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N. Stenzel has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Daher has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Dreher has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C.F. Vogelmeier has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: K. Kenn has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A.R. Koczulla has nothing to disclose., (Copyright ©The authors 2021.)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can result in a large variety of chronic health issues such as impaired lung function, reduced exercise performance and diminished quality of life. Our study aimed to investigate the efficacy, feasibility and safety of pulmonary rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients and to compare outcomes between patients with a mild/moderate and a severe/critical course of the disease., Methods: Patients in the post-acute phase of a mild to critical course of COVID-19 admitted to a comprehensive 3-week inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation programme were included in this prospective, observational cohort study. Several measures of exercise performance (6-min walk distance (6MWD)), lung function (forced vital capacity (FVC)) and quality of life (36-question short-form health survey (SF-36)) were assessed before and after pulmonary rehabilitation., Results: 50 patients were included in the study (24 with mild/moderate and 26 with severe/critical COVID-19). On admission, patients had a reduced 6MWD (mild: median 509 m, interquartile range (IQR) 426-539 m; severe: 344 m, 244-392 m), an impaired FVC (mild: 80%, 59-91%; severe: 75%, 60-91%) and a low SF-36 mental health score (mild: 49 points, 37-54 points; severe: 39 points, 30-53 points). Patients attended a median (IQR) 100% (94-100%) of all provided pulmonary rehabilitation sessions. At discharge, patients in both subgroups improved in 6MWD (mild/moderate: +48 m, 35-113 m; severe/critical: +124 m, 75-145 m; both p<0.001), FVC (mild/moderate: +7.7%, 1.0-17.8%, p=0.002; severe/critical: +11.3%, 1.0-16.9%, p<0.001) and SF-36 mental component (mild/moderate: +5.6 points, 1.4-9.2 points, p=0.071; severe/critical: +14.4 points, -0.6-24.5, p<0.001). No adverse event was observed., Conclusion: Our study shows that pulmonary rehabilitation is a feasible, safe and effective therapeutic option in COVID-19 patients independent of disease severity., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: R. Gloeckl has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Leitl has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: I. Jarosch has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Schneeberger has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C. Nell has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N. Stenzel has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C.F. Vogelmeier has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: K. Kenn has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A.R. Koczulla has nothing to disclose., (Copyright ©The authors 2021.)

Something simple, like changing a nasal cannula for a technologically superior one, can improve exercise capacity and oxygenation in patients with IPF. There is a need to develop improved cannulas for comfort and patient acceptance. https://bit.ly/2NelacE., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: T. Schneeberger has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Leitl has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Gloeckl has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: I. Jarosch has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Reimann has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: W. Hitzl has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Koczulla has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: K. Kenn has nothing to disclose., (Copyright ©ERS 2020.)

Background: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) following lung transplantation (LTx) is considered part of the optimal treatment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) for favourable post-operative outcomes. We investigated the effects of a PR intervention in the post-transplant phase with regard to lung function, exercise responses and cognitive function in COPD LTx recipients., Methods: 24 COPD LTx recipients (mean±sd forced expiratory volume in 1 s 75±22% predicted) were assigned to a comprehensive 3-week inpatient PR programme. Changes from PR admission to discharge in lung function variables, 6-min walk test-derived outcomes and cognitive function were assessed and examined for several factors. The magnitude of changes was interpreted by effect size (ES)., Results: In response to the PR intervention, LTx recipients had improved lung function with regard to diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (+4.3%; p=0.012) and static hyperinflation (residual volume/total lung capacity -2.3%; p=0.017), increased exercise capacity (6-min walk test +86 m; p<0.001), and had small to large improvements (ES range 0.23-1.00; all p≤0.34) in 50% of the administered cognitive tests. Learning skills and memory ability presented the greatest benefits (ES composite scores 0.62 and 0.31, respectively), which remained similar after stratification by single or bilateral LTx and sex., Conclusions: PR is an effective treatment for LTx recipients in the post-transplant phase, improving lung function, exercise responses, and domains of cognitive function of learning, memory and psychomotor speed. PR may facilitate the course of post-operative treatment and should be recommended in LTx., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: V. Andrianopoulos has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Gloeckl has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Boensch has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: K. Hoster has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Schneeberger has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: I. Jarosch has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R.A. Koczulla has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: K. Kenn has nothing to disclose.