Background Understanding the recovery of post‐COVID‐19 organ dysfunction is essential. We evaluated coagulation 6 months post‐COVID‐19, examining its recovery and association with lung function. Methods Patients treated for COVID‐19 at intensive care units between 3/2020 and 1/2021 were analyzed for complete blood count (CBC) and coagulation biomarkers (prothrombin time activity (%) (PT%), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen, coagulation factor VIII (FVIII), antithrombin (AT), and D‐dimer) during the 6 months post‐hospitalization. Results were compared with acute phase values and correlated with pulmonary function tests (PFT), including forced vital capacity (FVC) and hemoglobin‐corrected diffusing capacity percentage of predicted (DLCOc%), recorded 6 months post‐hospitalization. We examined the association between coagulation biomarkers and DLCOc% using linear regression with age, sex, and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) duration, and FVIII (correlated with DLCOc%) as covariates. Results Most CBCs and coagulation biomarkers had median values within the normal range. However, only 21% (15/70) of patients achieved full normalization of all biomarkers. Compared to acute COVID‐19, hemoglobin, PT%, and AT increased, while leukocytes, fibrinogen, FVIII, and D‐dimer decreased. Despite decreased levels, FVIII remained elevated in 46% (31/68), leukocytes in 26% (18/70), and D‐dimer in 27% (18/67) at 6 months. A weak negative correlation ( r = −0.37, p = .036) was found between DLCOc% and FVIII. Multivariable analysis revealed a weak, independent association between DLCOc% and FVIII. Excluding patients with anticoagulation therapy, FVIII no longer correlated with DLCOc%, while AT showed a moderate correlation with DLCOc%. Conclusion Only a few patients had normal CBC and coagulation biomarker values 6 months after critical COVID‐19. A weak negative correlation between DLCOc% and FVIII suggests that deranged coagulation activity may be associated with reduced diffusing capacity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kattainen et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: