PURPOSE: We investigated changes in ARDS severity and associations with outcome in COVID-19 ARDS patients.METHODS: We compared outcomes in patients with ARDS classified as 'mild', 'moderate' or 'severe' at calendar day 1, and after reclassification at calendar day 2. The primary endpoint was 28-day mortality. We also identified which ventilatory parameters had an association with presence of severe ARDS at day 2. We repeated the analysis for reclassification at calendar day 4.RESULTS: Of 895 patients, 8.5%, 60.1% and 31.4% had mild, moderate and severe ARDS at day 1. These proportions were 13.5%, 72.6% and 13.9% at day 2. 28-day mortality was 25.3%, 31.3% and 32.0% in patients with mild, moderate and severe ARDS at day 1 (p = 0.537), compared to 28.6%, 29.2% and 44.3% in patients reclassified at day 2 (p = 0.005). No ventilatory parameter had an independent association with presence of severe ARDS at day 2. Findings were not different reclassifying at day 4.CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of COVID-19 patients, ARDS severity and mortality between severity classes changed substantially over the first 4 days of ventilation. These findings are important, as reclassification could help identify target patients that may benefit from alternative approaches.
MULTIFILE
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.OBJECTIVES: This study: (1) investigated the accuracy of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and skinfold thickness relative to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the assessment of body composition in people with spinal cord injury (SCI), and whether sex and lesion characteristics affect the accuracy, (2) developed new prediction equations to estimate fat free mass (FFM) and percentage fat mass (FM%) in a general SCI population using BIA and skinfolds outcomes.SETTING: University, the Netherlands.METHODS: Fifty participants with SCI (19 females; median time since injury: 15 years) were tested by DXA, single-frequency BIA (SF-BIA), segmental multi-frequency BIA (segmental MF-BIA), and anthropometry (height, body mass, calf circumference, and skinfold thickness) during a visit. Personal and lesion characteristics were registered.RESULTS: Compared to DXA, SF-BIA showed the smallest mean difference in estimating FM%, but with large limits of agreement (mean difference = -2.2%; limits of agreement: -12.8 to 8.3%). BIA and skinfold thickness tended to show a better estimation of FM% in females, participants with tetraplegia, or with motor incomplete injury. New equations for predicting FFM and FM% were developed with good explained variances (FFM: R2 = 0.94; FM%: R2 = 0.66).CONCLUSIONS: None of the measurement techniques accurately estimated FM% because of the wide individual variation and, therefore, should be used with caution. The accuracy of the techniques differed in different subgroups. The newly developed equations for predicting FFM and FM% should be cross-validated in future studies.
Background: Lipoedema is a chronic disorder of adipose tissue typically involving an abnormal build-up of fat cells in the legs, thighs and buttocks. Occurring almost exclusively in women, it often co-exists with obesity. Due to an absence of clear objective diagnostic criteria, lipoedema is frequently misdiagnosed as obesity, lymphoedema or a combination of both. The purpose of this observational study was to compare muscle strength and exercise capacity in patients with lipoedema and obesity, and to use the findings to help distinguish between lipoedema and obesity. Design: This cross-sectional, comparative pilot study performed in the Dutch Expertise Centre of Lymphovascular Medicine, Drachten, a secondary-care facility, included 44 women aged 18 years or older with lipoedema and obesity. Twenty-two women with lipoedema (diagnosed according the criteria of Wold et al, 1951) and 22 women with body mass index ≥30kg/m2 (obesity) were include in the study. No interventions were undertaken as part of the study. Results: Muscle strength of the quadriceps was measured with the MicroFET™, and functional exercise capacity was measured with the 6-minute walk test. The group with lipoedema had, for both legs, significantly lower muscle strength (left: 259.9 Newtons [N]; right: 269.7 N; p < 0.001) than the group with obesity. The group with lipoedema had a non-significant, but clinically relevant lower exercise-endurance capacity (494.1±116.0 metres) than the group with obesity (523.9±62.9 metres; p=0.296). Conclusions: Patients with lipoedema exhibit muscle weakness in the quadriceps. This finding provides a potential new criterion for differentiating lipoedema from obesity. We recommend adding measuring of muscle strength and physical endurance to create an extra diagnostic parameter when assessing for lipoedema.
LINK
