Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Dyspnoea and clinical outcome in critically ill patients receiving noninvasive support for COVID-19 respiratory failure: post hoc analysis of a randomised clinical trial

Luca S. Menga, Domenico Luca Grieco, Tommaso Rosà, Melania Cesarano, Luca Delle Cese, Cecilia Berardi, Gabriele Pintaudi, Eloisa Sofia Tanzarella, Salvatore L. Cutuli, Gennaro De Pascale, Salvatore Maurizio Maggiore, Massimo Antonelli for the COVID-ICU Gemelli study group
ERJ Open Research 2021 7: 00418-2021; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00418-2021
Luca S. Menga
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Domenico Luca Grieco
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Domenico Luca Grieco
  • For correspondence: dlgrieco@outlook.it
Tommaso Rosà
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Melania Cesarano
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Luca Delle Cese
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cecilia Berardi
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gabriele Pintaudi
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eloisa Sofia Tanzarella
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Salvatore L. Cutuli
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gennaro De Pascale
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Salvatore Maurizio Maggiore
3University Dept of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, Gabriele d'Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy
4Dept of Anesthesiology, Critical Care Medicine and Emergency, S.S. Annunziata Hospital, Chieti, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Salvatore Maurizio Maggiore
Massimo Antonelli
1Dept of Emergency, Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2Istituto di Anestesiologia e Rianimazione, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Massimo Antonelli
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

In #COVID19 patients, presence of moderate-to-severe dyspnoea is a marker of disease severity correlated to clinical outcomes https://bit.ly/3Bp2G1b

To the Editor:

In non-COVID-19 acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, the entity of dyspnoea has been associated with severity of hypoxaemia, and represents a factor predicting noninvasive ventilation (NIV) failure, the need for endotracheal intubation and mortality [1].

In COVID-19 respiratory failure, the concept of “silent hypoxaemia” has been described: this is a condition of hypoxaemia without concomitant dyspnoea and/or signs of respiratory distress [2].

Whether in COVID-19 patients dyspnoea is related to outcome is unknown. We performed a post hoc analysis of a multicentre randomised trial (www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier number NCT04502576) that compared helmet NIV and high-flow nasal oxygen, aiming to assess the prevalence of dyspnoea in COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and to determine whether this may be related to study outcomes [3].

109 patients admitted to four ICUs and receiving noninvasive respiratory support due to COVID-19 acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (arterial oxygen tension (PaO2)/inspiratory oxygen fraction (FIO2) ratio ≤200) were analysed. The full protocol and study procedures are described elsewhere [3].

On ICU admission, all patients were asked to rate the subjective sensation of dyspnoea from 0 to 10, with 10 representing the worst symptom, through a visual analogue scale (VAS) [4–6]. Dyspnoea was re-evaluated at 1, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h after the initiation of the assigned treatment, which was either high-flow nasal oxygen or helmet NIV. Patients with VAS dyspnoea ≥4 were considered to have moderate-to-severe dyspnoea, while patients with VAS dyspnoea <4 were considered to have mild or no dyspnoea, as previously suggested [1].

The number of days free of advanced respiratory support (including high-flow nasal oxygen, NIV and invasive ventilation) within 28 days after enrolment; the proportion of patients who required endotracheal intubation within 28 days from study enrolment; the number of days free of invasive mechanical ventilation at day 28 and 60; 28-day, 60-day, in-ICU and in-hospital mortality; and ICU and hospital length of stay were the analysed outcomes.

Data are expressed as number of events (percentage) or median (interquartile range). Ordinal quantitative variables were compared with the Mann–Whitney U-test. Comparisons between groups regarding qualitative variables was performed with the Fisher's exact or the Chi-square test, as appropriate. Correlation was assessed with Pearson's correlation. Multivariate analyses adjusting for covariates were conducted through linear or logistic regression models. Kaplan–Meier curves are displayed for results concerning intubation rate. Intergroup differences in quantitative variables distribution in the initial 48 h of treatment were assessed with ANOVA. All results with two-sided p-values ≤0.05 were considered statistically significant. A post hoc calculation of power was computed for the days free of respiratory support at 28 days, adjusting for the covariates, resulting in a power of 0.70. Statistical analysis was performed with IBM SPSS Statistics 26 and GraphPad Prism 7.

In the whole population (109 patients, median age 65 years (interquartile range (IQR) 55–70 years); 21 (19%) women), median (IQR) PaO2/FIO2 on ICU admission was 102 (82–125) mmHg, median respiratory rate was 28 (24–32) breaths per min and median VAS dyspnoea was 4 (1–7). 52 (48%) had moderate-to-severe dyspnoea while 57 (52%) had mild or no dyspnoea.

Demographics and most relevant study results are displayed in table 1. VAS dyspnoea on ICU admission was not related to respiratory rate (r=0.16, p=0.09), PaO2/FIO2 (r= −0.14, p=0.15), arterial carbon dioxide tension (PaCO2) (r<0.1, p=0.97) or PaO2 (r=0.07, p=0.50).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Characteristics at inclusion and study outcomes, according to study group

The median (IQR) days free of respiratory support within 28 days after randomisation were 12 (0–23) in the moderate-to-severe dyspnoea group and 21 (4–25) in the mild or no dyspnoea group (p=0.01, after adjustment for PaO2/FIO2 at enrolment, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II and use of helmet NIV or high-flow oxygen).

44 patients required endotracheal intubation within 28 days of enrolment. The rate of endotracheal intubation was higher in patients with moderate-to-severe dyspnoea than those with mild or no dyspnoea (52% versus 30%), with an odds ratio of 3.8 (95% CI 1.5–9.9) (p=0.006, adjusted for PaO2/FIO2 at enrolment, SAPS II score and use of helmet NIV or high-flow oxygen).

After 1 h of respiratory support, only patients that had moderate-to-severe dyspnoea on arrival showed significant improvement in VAS dyspnoea (median (IQR) VAS dyspnoea at enrolment versus after 1 h of the allocated treatment: 6.5 (5–7) versus 4 (2–5) respectively; mean difference 2.3 (95% CI 1.6–3), p<0.001), while patients with mild or no dyspnoea at arrival showed no changes in VAS dyspnoea (p=0.80). Nevertheless, despite the use of the allocated interface, patients that, on enrolment, showed higher VAS dyspnoea remained, overall, most dyspnoeic over time (mean±sd 3.6±2.4 versus 1.5±1.7 respectively; mean difference 2.1 (95% CI 1.7–2.5), one-way ANOVA p<0.001).

Conversely, over the initial 48 h of treatment, patients who subsequently required endotracheal intubation had higher mean VAS dyspnoea than the those who avoided intubation through the noninvasive treatment (3.4±2.6 versus 2.1±2.1 respectively; mean difference 1 (95% CI 1–2), p<0.001).

Patients with moderate-to-severe dyspnoea had fewer days free of invasive ventilation at days 28 and 60, longer ICU and hospital lengths of stay, and higher in-ICU and in-hospital mortality. There was no significant difference in 28- and 60-day mortality (table 1).

In this post hoc analysis of a randomised clinical trial conducted in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU with moderate-to-severe hypoxaemic respiratory failure and receiving a trial of noninvasive respiratory support, 52 patients (48%) showed moderate-to-severe dyspnoea on ICU admission. Conversely, 57 patients (52%) had moderate-to-severe oxygenation impairment with mild or no dyspnoea, possibly representing silent hypoxaemia.

Reporting moderate-to-severe dyspnoea on ICU admission was independently associated with increased need for endotracheal intubation, fewer respiratory support-free days, fewer invasive mechanical ventilation-free days at day 28 and 60, longer ICU and hospital length of stay, and higher in-ICU and in-hospital mortality.

The perception of dyspnoea is mediated by many physiological factors, including PaO2 and PaCO2. Increases in respiratory drive and dyspnoea appear only when PaO2 falls below 60–70 mmHg and PaCO2 is >39 mmHg [2, 7, 8]; however, PaO2 is usually maintained by clinicians >60 mmHg for safety reasons and PaCO2 is commonly <39 mmHg due to higher sensitivity of the respiratory centre to carbon dioxide stimulus in patients with acute respiratory failure [8]. Indeed, only five patients exhibited PaO2 <60 mmHg and/or PaCO2 >39 mmHg, and among them, only two were not showing signs of dyspnoea.

In our cohort, patients that showed high-to-moderate dyspnoea on enrolment had a higher risk of endotracheal intubation and higher in-ICU mortality, confirming that the self-reported sensation of dyspnoea is not related to hypoxaemia or hypercapnia per se, but rather to the entity of pulmonary damage and to the severity of illness.

In COVID-19-induced moderate-to-severe acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, the presence of moderate-to-severe dyspnoea has high prevalence, independently of the degree of oxygenation impairment, similarly to non-COVID-19 moderate-to-severe respiratory failure [1].

Presence of moderate-to-severe dyspnoea might be a marker of disease severity correlated to outcomes, possibly configuring a clinical subphenotype of COVID-19 severe respiratory failure. Use of noninvasive support in COVID-19 patients is common [9–12]. While considering a trial of noninvasive respiratory support in COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe respiratory failure, the presence of dyspnoea, measured during conventional oxygen therapy, in conjunction with other variables such as respiratory rate and degree of hypoxia, may represent a simple alert tool to identify patients with the highest risk of endotracheal intubation.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to all intensive care unit physicians, residents, nurses and personnel from the participating centres, whose sacrifice, efforts, devotion to patients and passion have made possible this timely report.

Members of the COVID-ICU Gemelli study group: Gian Marco Anzellotti, Giuseppe Bello, Maria M. Bitondo, Maria Grazia Bocci, Filippo Bongiovanni, Simone Carelli, Laura Cascarano, Giorgio Conti, Paolo De Santis, Antonio M. Dell'Anna, Mariangela Di Muro, Miriana Durante, Giulia Falò, Nicoletta Filetici, Veronica Gennenzi, Antonio Gullì, Gianmarco Lombardi, Alessio Maccaglia, Riccardo Maviglia, Alessandro Mele, Giovanna Mercurio, Teresa Michi, Tony C. Morena, Luca Montini, Jonathan Montomoli, Martina Murdolo, Daniele Natalini, Mariano Alberto Pennisi, Edoardo Piervincenzi, Stefania Postorino, Francesca Pozzana, Martina Savino, Roberta Scarascia, Angela Scavone, Donatella Settanni, Serena Silva, Savino Spadaro, V. Marco Ranieri, Tommaso Tonetti, Joel Vargas, Matteo Velardo, Carlo Alberto Volta and Carmelina Zaccone.

Footnotes

  • Author contributions: L.S. Menga, D.L. Grieco and M. Antonelli conceived the study. All authors contributed to data acquisition. T. Rosà conducted statistical analysis. L.S. Menga and T. Rosà interpreted the data and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. D.L. Grieco and M. Antonelli critically revised the manuscript. M. Antonelli organised the study as an overall supervisor. All the authors reviewed the final draft of the manuscript and agreed to submit it to ERJ Open Research.

  • Conflict of interest: L.S. Menga has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: D.L. Grieco reports nonfinancial support from Maquet and Air Liquide, and grants from GE, outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: T. Rosà has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Cesarano has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: L. Delle Cese has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: C. Berardi has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: G. Pintaudi has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: E.S. Tanzarella has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: S.L. Cutuli has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: G. De Pascale has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: S.M. Maggiore reports grants from Fisher and Paykel Healthcare, and personal fees from Dreger Medical and GE Healthcare, outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Antonelli reports grants from GE and Toray, and personal fees from Maquet, outside the submitted work.

  • Support statement: The study was funded by a research grant (2017 MSD award) by the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Intensive Care Medicine (SIAARTI). The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Outside of the submitted work, D.L. Grieco is supported by a research grant by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Funding information for this article has been deposited with the Crossref Funder Registry.

  • Received July 10, 2021.
  • Accepted July 15, 2021.
  • Copyright ©The authors 2021
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org

References

  1. ↵
    1. Dangers L,
    2. Montlahuc C,
    3. Kouatchet A, et al.
    Dyspnoea in patients receiving noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure: prevalence, risk factors and prognostic impact: a prospective observational study. Eur Respir J 2018; 52: 1702637. doi:10.1183/13993003.02637-2017
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Tobin MJ,
    2. Laghi F,
    3. Jubran A
    . Why COVID-19 silent hypoxemia is baffling to physicians. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2020; 202: 356–360. doi:10.1164/rccm.202006-2157CP
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Grieco DL,
    2. Menga LS,
    3. Cesarano M, et al.
    Effect of helmet noninvasive ventilation vs high-flow nasal oxygen on days free of respiratory support in patients with COVID-19 and moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure: the HENIVOT randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2021; 325: 1731–1743. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.4682
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Grieco DL,
    2. Menga LS,
    3. Raggi V, et al.
    Physiological comparison of high-flow nasal cannula and helmet noninvasive ventilation in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2020; 201: 303–312. doi:10.1164/rccm.201904-0841OC
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Ries AL
    . Minimally clinically important difference for the UCSD shortness of breath questionnaire, Borg scale, and visual analog scale. COPD J Chronic Obstr Pulm Dis 2005; 2: 105–110. doi:10.1081/COPD-200050655
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Dres M,
    2. Similowski T,
    3. Goligher EC, et al.
    Dyspnea and respiratory muscles ultrasound to predict extubation failure. Eur Respir J 2021; in press [https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.00002-2021].
  6. ↵
    1. Spinelli E,
    2. Mauri T,
    3. Beitler JR, et al.
    Respiratory drive in the acute respiratory distress syndrome: pathophysiology, monitoring, and therapeutic interventions. Intensive Care Med 2020; 46: 606–618. doi:10.1007/s00134-020-05942-6
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. ↵
    1. Vaporidi K,
    2. Akoumianaki E,
    3. Telias I, et al.
    Respiratory drive in critically ill patients. pathophysiology and clinical implications. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2020; 201: 20–32. doi:10.1164/rccm.201903-0596SO
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. ↵
    1. Grieco DL,
    2. Maggiore SM,
    3. Roca O, et al.
    Non-invasive ventilatory support and high-flow nasal oxygen as first-line treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and ARDS. Intensive Care Med 2021; 47: 851–866.
    OpenUrl
    1. Franco C,
    2. Facciolongo N,
    3. Tonelli R, et al.
    Feasibility and clinical impact of out-of-ICU noninvasive respiratory support in patients with COVID-19-related pneumonia. Eur Respir J 2020; 56: 2002130. doi:10.1183/13993003.02130-2020
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Vianello A,
    2. Arcaro G,
    3. Molena B, et al.
    High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy to treat patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure consequent to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Thorax 2020; 75: 998–1000. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-214993
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Menga LS,
    2. Cese LD,
    3. Bongiovanni F, et al.
    High failure rate of noninvasive oxygenation strategies in critically Ill subjects with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. Respir Care 2021; 66: 705–714. doi:10.4187/respcare.08622
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 7 Issue 4 Table of Contents
ERJ Open Research: 7 (4)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Dyspnoea and clinical outcome in critically ill patients receiving noninvasive support for COVID-19 respiratory failure: post hoc analysis of a randomised clinical trial
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Dyspnoea and clinical outcome in critically ill patients receiving noninvasive support for COVID-19 respiratory failure: post hoc analysis of a randomised clinical trial
Luca S. Menga, Domenico Luca Grieco, Tommaso Rosà, Melania Cesarano, Luca Delle Cese, Cecilia Berardi, Gabriele Pintaudi, Eloisa Sofia Tanzarella, Salvatore L. Cutuli, Gennaro De Pascale, Salvatore Maurizio Maggiore, Massimo Antonelli
ERJ Open Research Oct 2021, 7 (4) 00418-2021; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00418-2021

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Dyspnoea and clinical outcome in critically ill patients receiving noninvasive support for COVID-19 respiratory failure: post hoc analysis of a randomised clinical trial
Luca S. Menga, Domenico Luca Grieco, Tommaso Rosà, Melania Cesarano, Luca Delle Cese, Cecilia Berardi, Gabriele Pintaudi, Eloisa Sofia Tanzarella, Salvatore L. Cutuli, Gennaro De Pascale, Salvatore Maurizio Maggiore, Massimo Antonelli
ERJ Open Research Oct 2021, 7 (4) 00418-2021; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00418-2021
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Acute lung injury and critical care
  • Respiratory infections and tuberculosis
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • Profiles of host responses in plasma and LRT during ARF
  • Expansion of ST2-expressing macrophages in BOS
  • S. pneumoniae re-emerges as a cause of CAP
Show more Research letters

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About ERJ Open Research

  • Editorial board
  • Journal information
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Online ISSN: 2312-0541

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society